License clarification for UPM 2.0.7: MIT metadata vs Apache-2.0 LICENSE #109

Hi Endel,

Thank you for maintaining NativeWebSocket.

We are using the Unity UPM package version 2.0.7 at commit:
c612a4f

While preparing third-party notices for our application, we noticed:

• The UPM package.json declares MIT.
• The corresponding source tag 2.0.7 has an Apache-2.0 LICENSE, with copyright notices for Endel Dreyer and Jiri Hybek.
• NativeWebSocket.jspre separately declares MIT and credits Stephen Hodgson.
• The UPM assembly workflow does not copy the root LICENSE into the generated package.

We compared the installed package with the source tag 2.0.7, following the official assembly steps, and confirmed that the implementation files match.

Could you please clarify:

1. Which license applies to the core library and the Unity integration files in UPM 2.0.7?
2. Which complete copyright and license notices should we include when distributing an application using this package?
3. Could the authoritative LICENSE and any required NOTICE files be included in the UPM package?

References:

• Source LICENSE:
  https://github.com/endel/NativeWebSocket/blob/2.0.7/LICENSE
• Unity package metadata:
  https://github.com/endel/NativeWebSocket/blob/2.0.7/integrations/Unity/package.json
• WebGL MIT/authorship notice:
  https://github.com/endel/NativeWebSocket/blob/2.0.7/integrations/Unity/NativeWebSocket.jspre
• UPM assembly workflow:
  https://github.com/endel/NativeWebSocket/blob/2.0.7/.github/workflows/unity-upm-release.yml

Thank you for your help!