On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 09:48:03AM +0000, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
>...
> However, the SSPL is clearly not in the sprit of the DFSG, yet alone
> complimentary to the Debian's goals of promoting software or user
> freedom.
>...
You are treating "make it easy to build proprietary services on top of Debian"
as the "sprit of the DFSG".
There is no general agreement in Debian about this, and another major
opinion is along the spirit of the (A)GPL to enforce as much of the
system as possible to be non-proprietary.
> ... it is difficult to point towards a clear-cut
> violation of the DFSG that we could all agree on due to both legal and
> language fuzziness. However, even if we could, there is always a
> slight tendency to treat the DFSG (and the Open Source Definition more
> generally) as a of narrowly-interpretable checklist.
>...
It was surely not intended, but it comes across like an completely
arbitrary decision.
Please elaborate what is the relevant difference that makes the AGPL
DFSG-free but SSPL v1 not.
This might also be useful input for upstream how to make their licence
DFSG-compliant - upstream seems to be working on the fuzziness issue,
so giving good feedback on that might help them making their licence
DFSG-compliant.
> Regards,
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
