InfoWorld: Pentaho opens up further (Exhibit B to real MPL)

Matt Asay mjasay at
Tue Jan 30 18:03:43 UTC 2007

Sorry, Rick.  I misread your original message.

As for my company's use of attribution, two responses:

1.  I don't think anyone on this list gives these companies the benefit of a
doubt.  I've been pushing the company toward the GPL since the day I
started.  Given where we started, I'd say we've made tremendous progress.
And much as I personally dislike attribution, I still hold that it's open
source.  Not the open source I personally prefer, but open source.  (That
said, I see the #10 argument and we are reviewing how to meet the
community's concerns on that issue.  Stay tuned.

2.  It's OSI that is being slow on the attribution debate, not the
companies.  A license has been submitted.  The ball is in OSI's court.  As
such, it doesn't do much good to further hector the companies.  They've done
what has been asked of them by OSI.  We just have to wait and see at this


P.S.  I'll update the blog again.  :-)

> From: Rick Moen <rick at>
> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 09:46:41 -0800
> To: <license-discuss at>
> Subject: Re: InfoWorld: Pentaho opens up further (Exhibit B to real MPL)
> Quoting Matt Asay (mjasay at
>> Thanks for calling this out.  I wasn't aware that they hadn't gone 'all the
>> way' to the MPL.  I tried looking on their site, and didn't see it.  I just
>> took The 451 Group's analysis of the move.
> Didn't Larry L. teach you to read the fine print?  ;->
>> Sorry for the (somewhat) false alarm.  I'll make a note of it on the
>> InfoWorld blog.
> Unfortunately, your update (today) on your blog
> (
> l)
> appears to state the facts _backwards_.
>    UPDATE: I just found out that Pentaho went to an MPL+attribution
>    model.
> Au contraire, sir!  They _were_ on an MPL + Exhibit B "badgeware"
> licence, but recently corrected that to actual MPL -- _removing_ their
> Exhibit B on the Pentalo BI Suite product -- citing as their reason
> "input from the development community along with our strong belief in
> being true open source contributors".  Which is of course exactly
> congruent with what badgeware critic Nicholas Goodman (of Pentalo) has
> been saying, you may recall (
> Don't take my word for it.  Download tarballs and check for yourself
> (that it's now _not_ MPL + "Exhibit B", but rather real MPL).  That's
> after all the best way, these days, of making sure someone isn't
> misrepresenting a licence, isn't it?
> And after you do, will you kindly correct today's misstatement of fact,
> and cease (in effect) maligning Pentaho by lumping them with the
> companies (like, well,... yours) whose licensing model they have
> _stopped_ using?
> Thank you.
> -- 
> "Is it not the beauty of an asynchronous form of discussion that one can go
> and 
> make cups of tea, floss the cat, fluff the geraniums, open the kitchen window
> and scream out it with operatic force, volume, and decorum, and then return to
> the vexed glowing letters calmer of mind and soul?" -- The Cube,

More information about the License-discuss mailing list