Thoughts on validating License-File presence in metadata version 2.1?

Due to https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/issues/4759 , an extremely large number of wheels fails metadata validation.
In a venv of around 800 packages I had lying around, about 75% of them have metadata that fails validation for this reason.

  |   File ".../python3.11/site-packages/packaging/metadata.py", line 752, in from_raw
  |     raise ExceptionGroup("invalid metadata", exceptions)
  | ExceptionGroup: invalid metadata (1 sub-exception)
  +-+---------------- 1 ----------------
    | packaging.metadata.InvalidMetadata: license-file introduced in metadata version 2.4, not 2.1
    +------------------------------------

It seems like it will take many years for this to be long ago enough that this stops being a regular issue for people who want to parse metadata (the setuptools issue is open; I learnt today that I uploaded a wheel with METADATA that fails validation today).

Given the widespread prevalence, should packaging.metadata have some (kwarg opt-out/in) special handling of License-File presence in metadata version 2.1, beyond just turning validation off entirely?

Begin at packaging.metadata.from_raw, where the traceback shows validation rejecting License-File as metadata 2.4 in a 2.1 document. Resolve the compatibility and opt-in behavior described in the issue; done means License-File handling is defined without disabling metadata validation globally.