[pacman-dev] License for new contributions?

[edmeister46 at hushmail.com]

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 13:55:27 -0400 Xavier Chantry 
<chantry.xavier at gmail.com> wrote:
>On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 6:42 PM,  <edmeister46 at hushmail.com> 
>wrote:
>> Hello pacman team!
>>
>> I've been following development for quite some time, and would 
>like
>> to submit my package signing patches for review.
>>
>
>Out of curiosity, what do these patches accomplish exactly ?

Bindings for openssl implemented in the backend (alpm).

>
>> However, since some of the files are entirely new, they would 
>have
>> a license header. I would like to know under what license should 
>I
>> release my work.
>>
>> I bring this up because during this time I overlooked the 
>inclusion
>> of the rankmirrors script, which I've now noticed to be GPL v3 
>code.
>>
>> Should my files be GPL v2 or v3?
>>
>
>Why don't you use the same header that all C files in pacman have,
>which is "gpl v2 or later" ?

You see, "or later" includes v3. And since I want to keep up to 
date with RMS' licenses, I prefer v3. Because of this, I'd like to 
know if v3 is acceptable before releasing my work. Some of v2 is 
sadly susceptible to loopholes.