3 ms·
Not forbidden, but SSPL goes beyond AGPL in a key way by defining the source that must be released as wider, including any code necessary to offer the covered c
by rezonant 6y ago
Not forbidden, but SSPL goes beyond AGPL in a key way by defining the source that must be released as wider, including any code necessary to offer the covered code as a service, such as user interfaces, backup mechanisms, provisioning etc. That might indeed be more than AWS is willing to do
- 015a 6y agoIts also worth saying, at least in Mongo's case, AWS's managed offering (DocumentDB) is not, in any way except the API, MongoDB. Internally its based on Aurora. But, by my understanding, the SSPL also covers MongoDB's API, so this is why DocumentDB has not attained anything higher than 3.6 compatibility (and even its 3.6 compatibility is ish, but that's not for legal reasons by my understanding). Amazon definitely doesn't want to open source Aurora. Not only is it a massive moat for their cloud, its an extremely powerful database, but there's enough evidence to conclude that its so internal-AWS-reliant that it would be almost useless to anyone not running on AWS.
- fabianhjr 6y agoAnd by the other hand it is more lax on what must be open source in case of non-ElasticSearch-as-aService usage. So from my PoV it is overall more lax than AGPL. (Definitely more lax for non ElasticSearch-as-a-Service providers)