Confusing licence

[painhardcore]

LICENSE.md says that project is under Apache License 2.0.
But in files we have:

lastbackend/cmd/api/api.go

Lines 2 to 17 in 941af64

	// Last.Backend LLC CONFIDENTIAL
	// __________________
	//
	// [2014] - [2019] Last.Backend LLC
	// All Rights Reserved.
	//
	// NOTICE: All information contained herein is, and remains
	// the property of Last.Backend LLC and its suppliers,
	// if any. The intellectual and technical concepts contained
	// herein are proprietary to Last.Backend LLC
	// and its suppliers and may be covered by Russian Federation and Foreign Patents,
	// patents in process, and are protected by trade secret or copyright law.
	// Dissemination of this information or reproduction of this material
	// is strictly forbidden unless prior written permission is obtained
	// from Last.Backend LLC.
	//

Please choose under what type of license this project is.

[kirillDanshin]

Apache License 2.0 requires licensed files to contain a header, as noticed here:

lastbackend/LICENSE

Lines 178 to 196 in 9bb5676

	APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work.
	To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following
	boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "{}"
	replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
	the brackets!) The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
	comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
	file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
	same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier
	identification within third-party archives.
	Copyright 2014-2019 LLC "Last.Backend"
	Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
	you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
	You may obtain a copy of the License at
	http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0

Please notice, that that lines are just header template, and they do not affect file license itself.
So, currently, this project is proprietary, while being open-source.

[undassa]

@kirillDanshin @painhardcore Thanks for issue. Will fix this on beta2 release next week.

[kirillDanshin]

Some additional thoughts.

Current header states

 // Last.Backend LLC CONFIDENTIAL 

Published files are by definition not confidential, so you should either split your repositories properly and prepare public version by replacing license with a valid one (proprietary or Apache 2.0), or move both repositories to a consistent and valid license.

If you plan to use proprietary license, please consider describing your license terms properly to avoid unnecessary license-related issues for self-hosted users.

[undassa]

@kirillDanshin our legal team is creating a normal license path to fix this..
We have delay with our release to the next week. License fix will be included.

thx with this issue.

[kirillDanshin]

@undassa ping me if you'll need help or review