fix(license): adopt rust-style dual-license layout for github detection

[willsarg]

Summary

• switch to Rust-style dual-license layout by removing root LICENSE
• keep canonical dual-license files at repo root: LICENSE-APACHE and LICENSE-MIT
• update README badge links to point to LICENSE-APACHE
• keep CI/release behavior aligned with the new root license file set

Why

GitHub license detection was returning NOASSERTION after the previous change. The Rust ecosystem convention (LICENSE-APACHE + LICENSE-MIT) is recognized by GitHub and should restore Apache detection while preserving dual licensing.

Validation

• node -c .github/workflows/scripts/ci_license_file_owner_guard.js

[github-actions]

PR intake checks found warnings (non-blocking)

Fast safe checks found advisory issues. CI lint/test/build gates still enforce merge quality.

• Missing required PR template sections: ## Validation Evidence (required), ## Security Impact (required), ## Privacy and Data Hygiene (required), ## Rollback Plan (required)
• Incomplete required PR template fields: summary problem, summary why it matters, summary what changed, validation commands, security risk/mitigation, privacy status, rollback plan

Action items:

1. Complete required PR template sections/fields.
2. Remove tabs, trailing whitespace, and merge conflict markers from added lines.
3. Re-run local checks before pushing:
   • ./scripts/ci/rust_quality_gate.sh
   • ./scripts/ci/rust_strict_delta_gate.sh
   • ./scripts/ci/docs_quality_gate.sh

Run logs: https://github.com/zeroclaw-labs/zeroclaw/actions/runs/22264946332

Detected blocking line issues (sample):

• none

Detected advisory line issues (sample):

• none

Workflow files changed in this PR:

• .github/workflows/main-branch-flow.md
• .github/workflows/pub-release.yml
• .github/workflows/scripts/ci_license_file_owner_guard.js

Reminder: workflow changes require owner approval via CI Required Gate.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR migrates the repository from a single root LICENSE file to a Rust-style dual-license layout with separate LICENSE-APACHE and LICENSE-MIT files. This change is intended to improve GitHub's license detection, which was returning NOASSERTION with the previous structure.

Changes:

• Removed the root LICENSE file containing the Apache 2.0 license text
• Updated all README badge links (across 6 localized versions) to point to LICENSE-APACHE instead of LICENSE
• Updated CI/workflow scripts and documentation to remove LICENSE from the protected files list, keeping only LICENSE-APACHE and LICENSE-MIT
• Modified the release workflow to exclude the removed LICENSE file from artifact packaging and checksum generation

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 11 out of 11 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
LICENSE	Deleted root LICENSE file (Apache 2.0 text)
README.md, README.zh-CN.md, README.vi.md, README.ru.md, README.ja.md, README.fr.md	Updated license badge links from LICENSE to LICENSE-APACHE
docs/ci-map.md	Updated documentation to remove LICENSE from protected files list
.github/workflows/main-branch-flow.md	Updated workflow documentation to remove LICENSE from protected files list
.github/workflows/scripts/ci_license_file_owner_guard.js	Removed LICENSE from protected files Set
.github/workflows/pub-release.yml	Removed LICENSE file copying and checksum generation steps

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)

LICENSE:1

• Removing the LICENSE file will break existing references in several files that are not updated in this PR:

1. .github/labeler.yml line 7: references LICENSE in docs labeling
2. .github/workflows/scripts/pr_labeler.js line 295: checks for LICENSE in isDocsLike function
3. firmware/zeroclaw-esp32-ui/README.md line 100: links to root LICENSE
4. python/README.md line 154: links to ../LICENSE
5. python/README.vi.md line 154: links to ../LICENSE

These references should be updated to point to LICENSE-APACHE or LICENSE-MIT (or both, depending on context) before removing this file to ensure completeness.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.