Theirs a java blender converter library that I was interested in.
But the license can only be decoupled to to the point of being Apache 2.0 license if you leave out the blender documentation. Not a problem there.
The reason for the different licensing is, that parts of the documentation are copied from Blender source code and Blender is published under GPLv2. Thus, the documentation is derived work and has to respect the terms of Blender’s license.
The different licenses mainly affect redistribution of work based on the documentation files. This means, if someone redistributes work which includes the original or modified documentation files or source code which contains parts of the documentation files (such as comments in generated facade classes), then this work has to respect the terms of the GPLv3.
Thus, if you consider redistributing derived work under a different license compatible with the Apache license of the SDK, than you just need to generate facade classes without Javadoc comments.
There is the “Derivative Works” comment that confuses me from Apache license which I interpret to mean anything that touches their license must
be free to use include a copy of the license.
“Derivative Works” shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object
form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the
editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes
of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain
separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of,
the Work and Derivative Works thereof.
How compatible is Apache 2.0 license with BSD 3.0?