Can we apply a workaround? As far as I understand Alternately, create a LICENSE directory and add a license file(s) with a name that matches your [SPDX license identifier](https://spdx.org/licenses/). such as LICENSES/Apache-2.0.txt. could be a viable workaround. As far as I understand the text it would be possible to add empty files LICENSES/Apache-2.0.txt and LICENSES/MIT.txt to workaround the problem, right?
PR triggered a change in the scorecard for the license check. https://github.com/zalando/skipper/blob/master/LICENSE is in general Apache but for one directory
pathmux
it's MIT. The license list shows that both are FSF and OSI license compliant.Alternately, create a LICENSE directory and add a license file(s) with a name that matches your [SPDX license identifier](https://spdx.org/licenses/). such as LICENSES/Apache-2.0.txt.
could be a viable workaround. As far as I understand the text it would be possible to add empty filesLICENSES/Apache-2.0.txt
andLICENSES/MIT.txt
to workaround the problem, right?