[DRAFT — needs Sangwu + Caitlin] Add top-level LICENSE file (Apache code + Krea 2 Community weights)

[asciidiego]

DRAFT. Do not merge without Sangwu's agreement + Caitlin's legal greenlight.
Assembled from the repo's existing, already-approved license texts — no legal wording written here.

What: add a top-level file named exactly LICENSE containing the existing Apache-2.0 text (code) followed by the existing Krea 2 Community License Agreement (weights), separated by a short pointer note — the agreed single-file convention (code license on top, model license below).

Why (grounded in the Mon 2026-06-22 launch meeting + this repo):

• Decision: a file literally named LICENSE must ship on GitHub and Hugging Face (GitHub only auto-detects when named license). Code = Apache-2.0, weights = Krea 2 Community License, combined in one file.
• Current state contradicts that: the only top-level license file is LICENSE.md = Apache-2.0, so GitHub will label the public repo "Apache-2.0"; the Krea 2 Community License lives only in docs/KREA-2-COMMUNITY-LICENSE, and git history shows a prior Delete LICENSE.
• Combined text is verbatim from LICENSE.md + docs/KREA-2-COMMUNITY-LICENSE (= the version at https://krea.ai/krea-2-licensing, "Krea 2 Community License Agreement v.1, June 22, 2026").

Approvers to decide: (1) confirm structure + the one-paragraph separator wording; (2) whether to remove the now-redundant LICENSE.md / docs/ copy; (3) mirror the same LICENSE onto the Hugging Face repos.

[mhitza]

If you put a LICENSE file with your model license, and a separate LICENSE-2.0.txt . I think both will be picked up by GitHub and show as different in a dropdown. At least seen this behaviour in some other repo.

You could also modify the readme to refer to the model as "open weights model", now it's called out as open source.

Just drive-by comment after discovering your project and seeing license mismatch.