Add LICENSE (copy of docker/docker's Apache-2.0 file)

[tianon]

This repository was missing a license, but since it's been created mostly from bits of github.com/docker/docker, I figured that license was probably appropriate for this top-level (since the individual vendored directories should have their LICENSE files intact anyhow).

A quick diff to show that it's 100% identical:

$ diff -u \
  <(curl -fsSL 'https://github.com/docker/docker/raw/master/LICENSE') \
  <(curl -fsSL 'https://github.com/tianon/docker-ce/raw/license/LICENSE')
$ 

[thaJeztah]

LGTM, thanks!

ping @andrewhsu @friism

[thaJeztah]

Interesting;

17:46:12 [init] Removing components/engine/docs/reference/commandline/export.md
17:46:12 [init] Removing components/engine/docs/reference/commandline/exec.md
17:46:12 [init] Removing components/engine/docs/reference/commandline/events.md
17:46:12 [init] CONFLICT (modify/delete): components/engine/docs/reference/commandline/dockerd.md deleted in origin/pr/103 and modified in HEAD. Version HEAD of components/engine/docs/reference/commandline/dockerd.md left in tree.
17:46:12 [init] Removing components/engine/docs/reference/commandline/diff.md
17:46:12 [init] Removing components/engine/docs/reference/commandline/deploy.md
17:46:12 [init] Removing components/engine/docs/reference/commandline/create.md

@andrewhsu this also needs to go into the 17.06.x branch

[friism]

Reposting my response from packaging issue:

Thanks for sending this PR. I don't think we should add a permissive license to this repo, however. The code in this repo is meant for the sole use of Docker Inc. to build packages for the Docker Community Edition products.

If this code had a permissive license, that might be misunderstood to mean that it's ok for others to build and distribute "Docker" packages (it's not ok, "Docker" is protected by a trademark owned by Docker Inc.).

Anyone interested in building something out of the open source components that go into Docker should use the Moby project, not this code: https://github.com/moby/moby

This packaging code is made available to provide transparency for Docker CE users, and to help them troubleshoot and report issues with Docker CE packages.

• Add LICENSE (copy of docker/docker's Apache-2.0 file) docker/docker-ce-packaging#30

[thaJeztah]

If this code had a permissive license, that might be misunderstood to mean that it's ok for others to build and distribute "Docker" packages (it's not ok, "Docker" is protected by a trademark owned by Docker Inc.).

Isn't that what this item in the license is included for?

   6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade
      names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor,
      except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the
      origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.

Wondering though, given that some components are taken from other repositories,
that are Apache licenced;

You may reproduce and distribute copies of the
Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without
modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You
meet the following conditions:

...

      (b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices
          stating that You changed the files; and

Reading that, does that imply that any file that has been modified (due to
cherry-picks/backports in this repository) must carry a comment stating what's
modified?

[Random-Liu]

Do we have a timeline for this? When are we going to have a LICENSE for docker-ce?

[StefanScherer]

The Windows community is blocked having no newer Docker CLI binary than 17.10 available for months. The chocolatey package "docker" using direct downloads from download.docker.com/win/static suffers from it. People ask me to update, but I cannot help.

There are people with enterprise Windows machines using other Hypervisors than VirtualBox (Docker Toolbox) and Hyper-V (Docker 4 Windows). Installing Toolbox where you only need the Docker CLI is a big overhead.

I looked for a way to compile docker.exe for a specific release version, but it's not possible to share such binary. The docker/cli repo has no tags and branches, so it's unusable. Only source of truth is this repo's components/cli subfolder. But without a license it's impossible to distribute such binary for the Chocolatey community.

[thaJeztah]

There’s a license inside the components/cli directory, so I wonder if that’s enough to build just the cli.

[tianon]

Any chance of this being revisited?

[StefanScherer]

LGTM

[thaJeztah]

wait with merging of this one; I got approval for the docker/docker-ce-packaging repo, but this one was not yet discussed

(FWIW, we're moving away from using this mono-repo in our build/packaging pipelines, so it will be obsolete in the near future)

Approval should be done in docker/docker-ce-packaging

[thaJeztah]

LGTM

let's bring this one in; ignoring CI as the Jenkins config was moved, and CI is not testing this, other than a DCO check, and the commit has a DCO sign-off