On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 3:47 AM, Thomas Goirand <[email protected]> wrote: > On 04/22/2013 10:33 AM, Richard Stallman wrote: >> If you host the platform and use it, that isn't SaaS. >> That is using your own computer. > > So, for you, the line is who is providing the hosting? > > I respectfully don't agree. A commercial hosting service > could provide a 100% free software hosted platforms, > which would be reproducible at home. I have no problem > with that. > > For me, the problem is more when the underlying IaaS > isn't free, when the SaaS uses a PaaS which isn't free, > or if the software on the SaaS platform isn't free. This > is where I draw the line, and this has absolutely nothing > to do with what kind of contract I have with my provider > (shared hosting, dedicated servers, collocation, or even > a public or private IaaS cloud). > > Thoughts?
Thomas, I tend to agree with Richard here, but would love to discuss this further. As I don't believe your definition of SaaS fits either the definition that Richard has an issue with, or the general definition used by the industry as a whole. It is my understanding that a SaaS service completely abstracts away the underlying software, such to the point, that the users of such a service have no control or real influence over the underlying software (whether built on Free Software or not.) In the case of Debian's infrastructure, even if an individual does not have administrative access to one of these services, they can talk to the admins, influencing the service, and even may, if they have the project's trust, combined with the ability and interest, gain administrative rights. (Depending on the service, this bar may be higher or lower than others.) In my mind (and presumably Richard's) SaaS is really about a lack of *control* over the application, and your own data, in exchange for divesting oneself of the responsibility of managing and developing said application and data. Perhaps, following your line of logic, the one exception to this might be a SaaS provider that does not own the copyright to the software they are providing as a service and that software has been released under the aGPL. I would consider this a SaaS offering, but perhaps one that I don't feel challenges Debian's values. (It's tricky as one still potentially loses control of one's data, and one still has to trust that the organization will follow the terms of the aGPL, so the question of trust really comes into play.) Richard, While I agree with much of what you have to say here, and respect and understand the FSF's guidance on avoiding the use of these terms, I will personally be advocating within the project, that rather than stop using the term "Cloud" or "Cloud Computing" that we clarify the definitions very explicitly, inline with the NIST definitions [1], and clarifying the project's positions on these types of services, rather than completely not using these terms. -Brian P.S. - If anyone hasn't read the NIST doc, please consider doing so. [1] - http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-145/SP800-145.pdf > Cheers, > > Thomas > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] > Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected] > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CACFaiRzsOP=hdrk6f_nsucq25-aigmpqeuulxyrqt31zrtp...@mail.gmail.com
