What you're describing is source-available. If that was the only criteria for an open source license, then there would be tons of additional proprietary softwar

What you're describing is source-available. If that was the only criteria for an open source license, then there would be tons of additional proprietary software we'd have to classify as open source -- Unreal Engine, for example. Regardless, the word isn't really the important part of Homebrew's decision. Whatever you want to call it, Homebrew has decided it can't include MongoDB in its repository while guaranteeing the freedoms of its users. A semantic debate over the meaning of 'open source' won't change that. That doesn't mean the semantic debate is useless, but regardless of where you fall on that debate, MongoDB's license does not guarantee freedom 0 of the FSF's definition, and that's going to effect which open source organizations are willing to distribute or build on top of MongoDB. You should expect platforms like Homebrew that care about freedom 0 to continue to abandon MongoDB.