Best practice about licences in cloned pallets

[Kailai-Wang]

Context

Not all pallets/code are initially developed by Litentry.

We have pallets that are either:

• forked/cloned from other repos (e.g. teerex/teeracle/sidechain), or
• working as a base, we modify and build on top of it (e.g. parachain-staking)

What's the best practice about the licence header here?

• Keep the original one (what about our changes), or
• Use Litentry's header but add README/doc to make it clear these are copied from othe projects

---

✔️ Please set appropriate labels and assignees if applicable.

[zTgx]

depends on the type of license, integritee's under Apache License 2.0， as the license said, You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices from the Source form of the Work.

so I think we should keep the original one, maybe we can add our license notice on top of it.

[github-actions]

❗ This issue is stale because it has been open for 60 days with no activity.
Remove Stale label or update it, otherwise this issue will be closed in 7 days.
@litentry/parachain

[github-actions]

❗ This issue is stale because it has been open for 60 days with no activity.
Remove Stale label or update it, otherwise this issue will be closed in 7 days.
@litentry/parachain