On the existence and safety of MongoDB in ports

RetroComputingCollector

RetroComputingCollector

On reading the SSPL, I can see how it can be interpreted in two ways. The "Sane Way" is just opensourcing your backend. The "Insane Way" is opensourcing your backend, drivers, BIOS and microcode (and possibly more!). I don't know how this software should be allowed in the ports collection. It is dangerous even in the realm of proprietary software as you don't even know when they could spring and sue. At least even Oracle's licenses make it clear that they are up to no good. I think this software should be removed from ports because I will not run an "I can get sued at any time" program.
 
That's what we're doing? US bashing? From what I assume is a European, i.e. from the charming land that brought cookie disclaimer spam to the world?
 
lost_in_c said:
That's what we're doing? US bashing? From what I assume is a European, i.e. from the charming land that brought cookie disclaimer spam to the world?
Click to expand...
Sure. I'm German, to save you the trouble of searching that. And the cookie disclaimers, think about that for a second, will you?
 
SSPL isn't open source. Also, I'm not sure it takes over as much as you think it does. It's more strict than the AGPL, and it requires the API used to be included. Not sure what the API entails, which API and if it means everything running the API, or just the API. Not sure if it says for much more beyond what's needed to run it, aside from being AGPL like.

The SSPL is Not an Open Source License

We’ve seen that several companies have abandoned their original dedication to the open source community by switching their core products from an open source license, one approved by the Open…
opensource.org opensource.org
 
sidetone said:
SSPL isn't open source. Also, it looks like it doesn't take over as much as you think it does. It's more strict than the AGPL, and it requires the API used to be included. Not sure if it says for much more beyond what's needed to run it, aside from being AGPL like.
Click to expand...
I actually read it, and here is what it says "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". The word "including" implies that this list is not just what you have to release. A sane person would interpret this as you did, but someone could interpret it as I did.
 
I edited it before you finished writing. I wrote, it depends on which API and if it means everything needed to run that API. That one makes AGPL look like a saint. It is in a way, because AGPL wasn't intended to do that. Even AGPL has a limit, but that one can take code after code. They could be trying to take code to make better software, but that's not an excuse to be that invasive.

I wouldn't use it. Stick with PostgreSQL, SQLite, or Apache's database. Or anything actually open source. I'm not sure if Apache's is in ports.

Good to know about potential implications of using that license.
 
sidetone said:
I edited it before you finished writing. I wrote, it depends on which API and if it means everything needed to run that API. That one makes AGPL look like a saint. It is in a way, because AGPL wasn't intended to do that. Even AGPL has a limit, but that one can take code after code. They could be trying to take code to make better software, but that's not an excuse to be that invasive.
Click to expand...
Especially considering that the IBM-compatible BIOS has a built in interrupt call system (that could be described as a crude API) built in, this could land you in a lot of hot water.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top