Since Common Workflow code appears to be under ALv2, it might be worth
contacting that community and asking them to re-license the logo under
ALv2 as well and explain how the current logo licensing makes ALv2
consumption more difficult if they want their logo included in downstream
releases.
My 2
Indeed, I find it wholly unthinkable that we'd include any LGPL bits in
an Apache product release, even if it's an ambiguous choice of licenses.
There is no ambiguity in what types of licenses are allowed in Apache
releases.
The only way to do this (IMO, I'm not VP, Legal) is to make clear that
w
