Hi every one,
I was on vacation, so sorry for the delated response.
As @mgruhler mentioned, there are some topics, which are related to our discourse:
- Bring the license information into the packages for ROS1
- Discuss and establish a (license information) baseline for ROS2
- Define a good practice about how to specify licensing and copyright information in ROS packages
Within this thread, I would like to focus on the first issue.
The easy way would be to create an issue and a belonging pull request to add the license info file for each package.
This might be a good solution if we just want do some try outs for some packages, to see if and how the license information file will be accepted and handled by the community.
Maybe there is also a “process” if changes will affect many packages, which I am not aware of.
-> If you know any additional option please write it down here.
At least it would be helpful if the package maintainers are informed about such a change. And if the approach is agreed by the quality assurance group.
I think it is important to bring the license information at right place before the topic will lose its momentum. 
For the topics about the ROS2 and the how to specify licensing and copyright information we can set up another discourse in parallel.