3 ms·

AGPL says SaaS needs to make source modifications available. SSPL says SaaS needs to make their whole stack open source. > “Service Source Code” means the Co

AGPL says SaaS needs to make source modifications available. SSPL says SaaS needs to make their whole stack open source. > “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.”

GordonS 8y ago
Then I don't get Mongo's beef here - with AGPL, AWS would have had to open source any changes to MongoDB, hence potentially leading to improvements in MongoDB, and "giving back to the community". Why would they think it was a good idea to make orgs open source their whole stack? Wouldn't this obviously result in companies moving away wholesale?
- SpicyLemonZest 8y ago
  It was an explicit goal to protect the sustainability of MongoDB's R&D investment in addition to encouraging community contributions. Source (original announcement): https://www.mongodb.com/press/mongodb-issues-new-server-side-public-license-for-mongodb-community-server https://www.mongodb.com/press/mongodb-issues-new-server-side...
  - Proven 8y ago
    Yeah right, except that enFORCING is different from "encouraging". Were outside Mongo contributors not encouraged before this license change?
- pas 8y ago
  https://stratechery.com/2019/aws-mongodb-and-the-economic-realities-of-open-source/ https://stratechery.com/2019/aws-mongodb-and-the-economic-re...
seba_dos1 8y ago
Not really - SSPL says SaaS needs to make their whole stack SSPL (which is not open source). You can't even use Linux, as it's GPLv2 (section 13 of SSPL is so poorly written it doesn't even use "Standard Interface" and "System Libraries" terms defined earlier and copied verbatim from the GPL).

GordonS 8y ago

Then I don't get Mongo's beef here - with AGPL, AWS would have had to open source any changes to MongoDB, hence potentially leading to improvements in MongoDB, and "giving back to the community". Why would they think it was a good idea to make orgs open source their whole stack? Wouldn't this obviously result in companies moving away wholesale?

SpicyLemonZest 8y ago
It was an explicit goal to protect the sustainability of MongoDB's R&D investment in addition to encouraging community contributions. Source (original announcement): https://www.mongodb.com/press/mongodb-issues-new-server-side-public-license-for-mongodb-community-server https://www.mongodb.com/press/mongodb-issues-new-server-side...
- Proven 8y ago
  Yeah right, except that enFORCING is different from "encouraging". Were outside Mongo contributors not encouraged before this license change?
pas 8y ago
https://stratechery.com/2019/aws-mongodb-and-the-economic-realities-of-open-source/ https://stratechery.com/2019/aws-mongodb-and-the-economic-re...

seba_dos1 8y ago

Not really - SSPL says SaaS needs to make their whole stack SSPL (which is not open source). You can't even use Linux, as it's GPLv2 (section 13 of SSPL is so poorly written it doesn't even use "Standard Interface" and "System Libraries" terms defined earlier and copied verbatim from the GPL).