Upon catching up on this thread, I believe most of what needs to be said
about the issue for Debian's perspective has been said. Nevertheless, I
do want to point out that I think three separate issues have been
conflated in this thread:
(a) Is the AGPLv3 a DFSG-free license and should it remain such?
(b) Is it a bad policy decision for Debian generally to have a core
library, used by many other packages under AGPLv3 -- thus causing
a move of licensing of more packages toward an effective AGPLv3
license, due to the combining those packages with an AGPLv3'd
(c) Even if (a) and (b) are settled in as "Yes", and "No",
respectively: is Oracle, given its history of abusive copyleft
enforcement (by refusing to allow full compliance as an adequate
remedy and demanding the purchase of proprietary licenses by
license violators), too dangerous for Debian and its downstream?