datacontract-specification vs. open-data-contract-standard

[alex-gitlab-is-better]

Hey, thank you for the great project.
I'm a bit confused about the future of the project. Is the project being maintained or is it going to be discontinued?

I'm asking that because of the following extract of your README:

If you haven’t adopted a YAML format yet, we recommend to start directly with the Open Data Contract Standard. It’s considered the conceptual successor and comes highly recommended.

So your recommendation is to use the Open Data Contract Standard instead of yours?
Is theOpen Data Contract Standard the successor of datacontract-specification specification?

[jgperrin]

@jochenchrist and @simonharrer, who are the pillars of this project, are also key members of the Bitol TSC since its inception. The original version of ODCS was differently rich, so we aligned the breaking changes and released ODCS v3 at the end of 2024. There are still a few differences that are non-breaking, and we hope to achieve the full upgrade with ODCS v3.1.

ODCS v3.1 will include all of DCS v1.2.0. We target ODCS v3.1 towards the end of August.

Bitol is a Linux Foundation project with a portfolio of open standards for product-oriented data engineering & management. It made perfect sense to collaborate to get a stronger set of standards. Please join us on Slack.

[alex-gitlab-is-better]

Hey @jgperrin, thank you for sharing the project direction.
Both initiatives are great, but I found the data contract project a bit nicer and cleaner, despite ODCS is probably being more complete.
Anyway, both are helpful and this merge will be for the good.
Thank you for the fast reply!

[jgperrin]

I agree, they have made a very nice website and documents, with clear examples... it's great work.

However, when companies are investing massive $$$ into their data contract strategy, open standards with a clear governance model take the lead. Help us make it better! As you see, we need help and we really welcome all people!