What are the restrictions on ported code (documentation) under the Apache 2.0 license?

Question

Apache HTTP Server

Hello.
There is a project under the Apache 2.0 license.
Part of the code is extracted from this project (documentation in C-header files) and ported in a different form (for example, Javadoc).
The question is, what obligations does the Apache 2.0 license impose on the author of a new library? Interested in specific points:
1) Is it possible to change the license to another? (MIT, BSD) And how to fix this change?
2) Do I need to save LICENCE and NOTICE as required by the original license?
3) Do I need to save and in what form copyrights inside the files?
4) Do I need to commit changes to files as described in Apache 2.0?
There is a global misunderstanding at what point (and to what extent) changes made to the original code become a new program. By and large, the new program is not a modified original. Moreover, this is not a program at all, but pieces of documentation taken with ctrl+c -> ctrl+v.

Answer 1

All your questions come down to one thing - can you ignore the terms of the license, and it doesn’t matter which one: Apache is not Apache, there is copyleft - no, it doesn’t even matter whether it is free or non-free.
Obviously, you can do this when what you are borrowing is not copyrighted at all due to something there - for example, because copyright ceased because the author died more than seventy years ago, well, or in the power of triviality.
What can people say here who do not see what it is all about? That most likely the author is still alive, and what you desired is not trivial (otherwise you would not have wasted your own and others' time here, but would have written it quickly yourself). But contact your legal adviser - maybe, having a full picture before his eyes, he will form a different opinion.
> Moreover, it's not a program at all, but pieces of documentation
And what, the copyright in our country already only applies to programs or what?
In general, it is extremely curious why you are so annoyed by the ASLv2 requirements that you are trying to get rid of them? Do you have something under GNU GPLv2=?