Please add LICENSE files to the Kandinsky 2.2 weights repositories on Hugging Face

Thanks for releasing Kandinsky 2.2 openly — this is a licensing paperwork request, not a bug.

This repository carries a proper `LICENSE` file (Apache-2.0). The **weights** repositories on Hugging Face, however, carry only a `license: apache-2.0` tag in the model-card front-matter, with no LICENSE file committed beside the weights:

- https://huggingface.co/kandinsky-community/kandinsky-2-2-prior — `license: apache-2.0` tag, no LICENSE file
- https://huggingface.co/kandinsky-community/kandinsky-2-2-decoder — `license: apache-2.0` tag, no LICENSE file

(Checked 2026-08-12 against the HF API; neither repository is gated.)

**Request:** could an actual `LICENSE` file be added to each of those two repositories, containing the Apache-2.0 text and the appropriate copyright line?

**Why it's worth the two minutes:** for anyone evaluating Kandinsky for use in a commercially distributed product, a metadata tag is a weaker signal than a licence file committed alongside the artefacts it covers — a tag is easy to set, easy to change, and does not itself state who holds the copyright. A LICENSE file in each weights repo would make the already-clear intent unambiguous at essentially no cost.

**A related question, if you have a moment:** `kandinsky-2-2-prior` also redistributes a CLIP ViT-bigG-14 text tower under `text_encoder/`. Upstream, `laion/CLIP-ViT-bigG-14-laion2B-39B-b160k` is tagged `mit` (also without a LICENSE file). Is the Apache-2.0 tag on the prior repo intended to cover that redistributed component too, or does it retain its upstream MIT terms? A one-line note in the model card would settle it.

Thanks either way, and no urgency — this is a documentation gap rather than a blocker.