Do we keep 3rdParty/bootstrap? Put licenses in templates.

Hi all:

In the roundup source tree we have a directory 3rdParty/bootstrap.

This is the original source for bootstrap 2.2.2. This is the version
used with the jinja and responsive templates.

The jinja template has been updated to use bootstrap 4.1.3. The
responsive template is still using 2.2.2.

Does anybody know of a reason we need to have the original 2.2.2
sources in the roundup repo?

AFAICT we have no local modifications and are not releasing a
Derivative Work from the bootstrap source. So we have no reason under
the bootstrap Apache license to keep an unmodified copy of the source.

The checkin comment by Pradip is:

  Add local copy of Bootstrap v2.2.2 (for packaging on Debian)

but Debian hasn't packaged roundup for many years.

The 4.1.3 bootstrap is under an MIT license which is even less
restrictive.

In both cases, it looks like we need to distribute the proper version
of the license file.

So I suggest removing 3rdParty/bootstrap, move the LICENSE file for
2.2. into
share/roundup/templates/responsive/Bootstrap_License. Similarly copy
the bootstrap 4.1.3 LICENSE file into
share/roundup/templates/jinja/Bootstrap_License.

Thoughts, comments?

--
				-- rouilj
John Rouillard
===========================================================================
My employers don't acknowledge my existence much less my opinions.