On Tuesday, October 16, 2018 5:47 PM, Xavier wrote:
>Le 16/10/2018 à 22:44, Florian Weimer a écrit :
>> * Xavier:
>>
>>>> From: Eliot Horowitz <eliot@mongodb.com>
>>>> Date: Tue Oct 16 13:03:02 UTC 2018
>>>> Subject: [License-review] Approval: Server Side Public License,
>>>> Version 1 (SSPL v1)
>>>> ...
>>>> “If you make the functionality of the Program or a modified version
>>>> available to third parties as a service, you must make the Service
>>>> Source Code available via network download to everyone at no charge,
>>>> under the terms of this License. Making the functionality of the
>>>> Program or modified version available to third parties as a service
>>>> includes, without limitation, enabling third parties to interact with
>>>> the functionality of the Program or modified version remotely through
>>>> a computer network, offering a service the value of which entirely or
>>>> primarily derives from the value of the Program or modified version,
>>>> or offering a service that accomplishes for users the primary purpose
>>>> of the Software or modified version.
>>>
>>> I feel this part fails against the dissident test but I could be wrong.
>>
>> I think you are right, but the test <Caution-https://wiki.debian.org/DissidentTest>
>> is not formally part of the Debian Free Software Guidelines.
>
>Right but as DFSG is just a guideline, my opinion is that:
> - formal success to DFSG is not enough (else we would have to change
> them more often, which would create detrimental instability),
> - if one of the 3 tests fails, we leave with an unfavorable opinion to
> start the discussion here.
>
>In this case, I feel that upstream team wants to limit freedom of their
>software while remaining just at the limit of the rules.
>
>So for now, my feeling> is that it's not in the spirit of DFSG, while
>respecting the words.
Forgive me for sidetracking this conversation, but what are the 3 tests? I
found the Desert Island Test, but not the third one.
Thanks,
Cem Karan