4 ms·

> "Service Source Code" means the Corresponding Source for the Program or the modified version, and the Corresponding Source for all programs that you use to ma

> "Service Source Code" means the Corresponding Source for the Program or the modified version, and the Corresponding Source for all programs that you use to make the Program or modified version available as a service, including, without limitation, management software, user interfaces, application program interfaces, automation software, monitoring software, backup software, storage software and hosting software, all such that a user could run an instance of the service using the Service Source Code you make available. How could one even practically conform to this license? Unless you are a 100% pure open source house, every company uses proprietary software in some form. Be it the OS/Apps on your developers/operations (management software) laptops (macOS/Windows) or firmware/tooling (ILO, DRAC, etc) of your server stack. I understand they want us to buy a proprietary mongo license, but I don't see how it would even be possible to run mongo as a service without.

cyphar 8y ago
It should also be noted that they require the "Service Source Code" to be provided under the terms of their license. So it's not possible for anyone to follow these restrictions even on a fully free software stack if any part of that stack is copyleft (for instance, Linux).
- aequitas 8y ago
  That was what first caught my eye as well, which would make it impossible. > The affected code must not only be released, it must be made available under the SSPL. But I think it should be interpreted that if you modify the code (mongodb) under SSPL it should be distributed under the same license, like is normal for other open source licenses.
  - cyphar 8y ago
    No, while they don't have the AGPL section, the wording in section 13 is pretty clear: > you must make the Service Source Code available via network download to everyone at no charge, under the terms of this License. Now, this only applies if you've modified the source code. But being barred from the effective right (due to the requirement mentioned above) to use modified versions of software makes it obviously proprietary.
tlrobinson 8y ago
> I understand they want us to buy a proprietary mongo license, but I don't see how it would even be possible to run mongo as a service without. I think that's the point...

cyphar 8y ago

It should also be noted that they require the "Service Source Code" to be provided under the terms of their license. So it's not possible for anyone to follow these restrictions even on a fully free software stack if any part of that stack is copyleft (for instance, Linux).

aequitas 8y ago
That was what first caught my eye as well, which would make it impossible. > The affected code must not only be released, it must be made available under the SSPL. But I think it should be interpreted that if you modify the code (mongodb) under SSPL it should be distributed under the same license, like is normal for other open source licenses.
- cyphar 8y ago
  No, while they don't have the AGPL section, the wording in section 13 is pretty clear: > you must make the Service Source Code available via network download to everyone at no charge, under the terms of this License. Now, this only applies if you've modified the source code. But being barred from the effective right (due to the requirement mentioned above) to use modified versions of software makes it obviously proprietary.

tlrobinson 8y ago

> I understand they want us to buy a proprietary mongo license, but I don't see how it would even be possible to run mongo as a service without. I think that's the point...