Clarification for a permissive licensing of a derivative work by example

Question

The situation is the following:

I am working on a binding project (using a library/framework built on Swift and binding for Xamarin/C#) which includes some sample apps/programs adopted from Swift to C# (means class, func and even variable names are almost identical). The original License for library/framework and the demos is APL 2.0, but I would like to use MIT/X11. So, my question is what shall I include in the source header files of the samples and the binding source (declaration file), in the AUTHORS file and in the LICENSE file? Thx, in advance for your help.

Original Header file includes:

Copyright 2016-present the [ORIG COPYRIGHT HOLDER]. All Rights Reserved.
...

Original AUTHORS file includes:

# This is the list of [OFIG COPYRIGHT HOLDER] for copyright
# purposes.
[ORIG AUTHOR1]
[ORIG AUTHOR2]
...

Original License file

The normal APL 2.0 license file

So, what the following should contain?

Derivative Header file:?

// Copyright (c) 2017 [which copyright holder here? the original, new or both?].
// All Rights Reserved.

Derivative AUTHORS file:?

# This is the list of [COPYRIGHT HOLDER] for copyright
# purposes.
[ORIG AUTHOR1?]
[ORIG AUTHOR2?]
[new author?]
...

Derivative project LICENSE file:?

MIT/X11, APL 2.0 or both?

Answer 1

The original License for library/framework and the demos is APL 2.0, but I would like to use MIT/X11.

Since this is a port and as you mentioned this means class, func and even variable names are almost identical ... then I doubt you can relicense this under another license unless the original license explicitly allows such thing. Assuming that your APL 2.0 means Apple Public Source License v2.0 there is no possibility offered to do such thing.