chore: add Apache-2.0 LICENSE

[khaliqgant]

Adds an Apache-2.0 LICENSE file and sets "license": "Apache-2.0" in package.json.

This repo was public with no license file (legally "all rights reserved" by default), which both left it unprotected and discouraged adoption. Apache-2.0 makes the open intent explicit. The managed cloud control plane remains separate and closed.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: a2152db9-ce37-4c92-9335-6aec6d61c94a

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 048fdbc and 93b4d81.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• LICENSE
• package.json

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This PR establishes Apache License 2.0 licensing for the repository by adding the full license text file and declaring the license in the package metadata. No code logic or functionality is modified.

Changes

Repository Licensing

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Apache License 2.0 metadata LICENSE, package.json	Repository is licensed under Apache License 2.0. The full license text (January 2004) with copyright notice for Agent Workforce Incorporated is added to LICENSE, and the license is declared in package.json metadata.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

---

🐰 A license arrives with care,
Apache's terms now everywhere!
Two small files, no code in sight,
Just legal words, all proper and right! ✨📜

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title 'chore: add Apache-2.0 LICENSE' clearly and concisely summarizes the main change: adding an Apache-2.0 license file to the repository.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description directly relates to the changeset, explaining why the Apache-2.0 license was added and what it accomplishes for the repository.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch chore/apache-2.0-license

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request adds an Apache-2.0 license file and updates the root package.json to specify the license. The review feedback points out a licensing inconsistency, noting that workspace packages still specify 'license': 'MIT', and suggests updating them to match the root license or documenting the dual-licensing.

[gemini-code-assist]

The root package.json is updated to Apache-2.0, but the workspace packages (such as packages/core/package.json, packages/sdk/typescript/package.json, etc.) still specify "license": "MIT". This creates a licensing inconsistency across the repository and the published packages. Update the workspace package licenses to match the root license, or document the dual-licensing if this is intentional.

[pullfrog]

✅ No new issues found.

Reviewed changes — adds the standard Apache-2.0 license text to the repo and declares the SPDX identifier in package.json.

• Add LICENSE file — verbatim Apache License 2.0 boilerplate, copyright "Agent Workforce Incorporated", 190 lines.
• Declare "license": "Apache-2.0" in package.json — uses the valid SPDX identifier, placed before "private".

  ^{｜ View workflow run ｜ 𝕏}

[github-actions]

Relayfile Eval Review

Run: .relayfile/evals/runs/2026-05-30T09-22-36-908Z-HEAD-provider
Mode: provider
Git SHA: 3f0c815

Passed: 4 | Needs human: 0 | Reviewable: 0 | Missing output: 0 | Failed: 0 | Skipped: 0

Human Review Cases

No reviewable human-review cases captured Relayfile output.

[cubic-dev-ai]

1 issue found across 2 files

Prompt for AI agents (unresolved issues)

Check if these issues are valid — if so, understand the root cause of each and fix them. If appropriate, use sub-agents to investigate and fix each issue separately.


<file name="package.json">

<violation number="1" location="package.json:3">
P2: Updating only the root manifest to Apache-2.0 creates inconsistent license metadata if workspace packages still publish MIT; align package-level `license` fields (or explicitly declare dual licensing) to avoid conflicting package licensing.</violation>
</file>

<sub>Reply with feedback, questions, or to request a fix.

Re-trigger cubic</sub>

[cubic-dev-ai]

P2: Updating only the root manifest to Apache-2.0 creates inconsistent license metadata if workspace packages still publish MIT; align package-level license fields (or explicitly declare dual licensing) to avoid conflicting package licensing.

Prompt for AI agents

Check if this issue is valid — if so, understand the root cause and fix it. At package.json, line 3:

<comment>Updating only the root manifest to Apache-2.0 creates inconsistent license metadata if workspace packages still publish MIT; align package-level `license` fields (or explicitly declare dual licensing) to avoid conflicting package licensing.</comment>

<file context>
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "relayfile",
+  "license": "Apache-2.0",
   "private": true,
   "version": "0.8.4",
</file context>