[v1.x] License updates per ASF feedback

[josephevans]

Address licensing concerns raised by our IPMC mentors:

1. Do not distribute 3rdparty/googletest/ci in source archive
2. Do not distribute docs/*** in source archive
3. Remove references to docs in LICENSE that are no longer distributed in source archive
4. Clarify include/mkldnn in LICENSE
5. Remove SIL open font license from licenses/ and reference in LICENSE

[mxnet-bot]

Hey @josephevans , Thanks for submitting the PR
All tests are already queued to run once. If tests fail, you can trigger one or more tests again with the following commands:

• To trigger all jobs: @mxnet-bot run ci [all]
• To trigger specific jobs: @mxnet-bot run ci [job1, job2]

---

CI supported jobs: [centos-cpu, windows-cpu, unix-cpu, website, clang, centos-gpu, sanity, edge, windows-gpu, miscellaneous, unix-gpu]

---

Note:
Only following 3 categories can trigger CI :PR Author, MXNet Committer, Jenkins Admin.
All CI tests must pass before the PR can be merged.

[leezu]

docs folder also contains the install instructions (build_from_source page)

[josephevans]

I would think most users building from source are following instructions from a web site, not viewing them from the source tree (after all, they are in .md format and would require viewing through a formatter/browser.) Do you think it's a requirement to ship them out in the source archive though?

[leezu]

I don't think it's a requirement, but it's not ideal as the website may change over time, while the archive remains fixed.

[josephevans]

True, but the git version tag will always be there.

[kezhenxu94]

I think at least a link to the install instructions is needed

[TristonC]

Have you or have you heard anyone use the docs inside the release package?

[TristonC]

@josephevans Can we only keep the install instructions?

[josephevans]

If you mean the build instructions, they are in https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/blob/v1.x/docs/static_site/src/pages/get_started/build_from_source.md - we could copy this file to the root source archive. Alternatively, we could create a README.txt file with a link to the instructions on the web-site (but the latest version would have to be published.)

[samskalicky]

thanks @josephevans

[ChaiBapchya]

Thanks!

[ptrendx]

Removing entire docs directory just because of few fonts seems like quite a heavy handed approach. Could we instead just download those fonts as part of docs CD pipeline?

[josephevans]

Removing entire docs directory just because of few fonts seems like quite a heavy handed approach. Could we instead just download those fonts as part of docs CD pipeline?

I agree that it's a fairly drastic change, but I am not convinced many users actually use the docs from the source archive. It takes a bit of effort to get them built and requires viewing them through a browser, and I would bet most people don't go through this effort and just use the documentation online.