On Tuesday, October 16, 2018 5:47 PM, Xavier wrote: >Le 16/10/2018 à 22:44, Florian Weimer a écrit : >> * Xavier: >> >>>> From: Eliot Horowitz <el...@mongodb.com> >>>> Date: Tue Oct 16 13:03:02 UTC 2018 >>>> Subject: [License-review] Approval: Server Side Public License, >>>> Version 1 (SSPL v1) >>>> ... >>>> “If you make the functionality of the Program or a modified version >>>> available to third parties as a service, you must make the Service >>>> Source Code available via network download to everyone at no charge, >>>> under the terms of this License. Making the functionality of the >>>> Program or modified version available to third parties as a service >>>> includes, without limitation, enabling third parties to interact with >>>> the functionality of the Program or modified version remotely through >>>> a computer network, offering a service the value of which entirely or >>>> primarily derives from the value of the Program or modified version, >>>> or offering a service that accomplishes for users the primary purpose >>>> of the Software or modified version. >>> >>> I feel this part fails against the dissident test but I could be wrong. >> >> I think you are right, but the test >> <Caution-https://wiki.debian.org/DissidentTest> >> is not formally part of the Debian Free Software Guidelines. > >Right but as DFSG is just a guideline, my opinion is that: > - formal success to DFSG is not enough (else we would have to change > them more often, which would create detrimental instability), > - if one of the 3 tests fails, we leave with an unfavorable opinion to > start the discussion here. > >In this case, I feel that upstream team wants to limit freedom of their >software while remaining just at the limit of the rules. > >So for now, my feeling> is that it's not in the spirit of DFSG, while >respecting the words.
Forgive me for sidetracking this conversation, but what are the 3 tests? I found the Desert Island Test, but not the third one. Thanks, Cem Karan