We’re happy to announce that we’ve made the PartiQL specification sources live on Github as the partiql/partiql-spec repository!https://amzn.to/33qrLI6
-
-
Replying to @AWSOpen
Congratulations
@tacertain@AlmannGoo@YannisGP and team. I have read some initial doc and there are very interesting ideas. Also questions, like the (non open source?) license for the spec, if you considered using Antlr for the parser and if JSONPath in modern SQL was not enough4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @_Mark_Atwood @AWSOpen and
I saw. I understand the patent license makes it not open source, even though I understand rationale behind. I'd still suggest reconsidering this for broader adoption, if this could be my 2 cents.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ahachete @_Mark_Atwood and
Disclosure: I am not a lawyer. I don't see how open source licenses are the right tool to license patents that are part of a standard doc. The Apache license for the sample implementation carries a patent license, so the SI is a fully Free and
#OpenSource embodiment of PartiQL.1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @_msw_ @_Mark_Atwood and
I was referring not to the Sample Implementation but rather to the spec itself. Unless I'm mistaken, it carries a license which I don't identify as
@OpenSourceOrg -approved. Indeed reminds me of Facebook's React license change. I'm just suggesting this to increase adoption ;)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ahachete @_Mark_Atwood and
That's right, the spec itself is not under an open source license. A related topic: somewhat ironically, open source licenses are often not provided under an open source license.
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @_msw_ @_Mark_Atwood and
My recommendation is to make the spec under an open source license. The current license may prevent commercial entities to collaborate, due to fear of patent issues and/or litigation. It's not that I believe everything must be open source license. It's for broader adoption, IMHO
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Maybe the open source community could ask some of the existing trusted open source foundations, such as Linux Foundation, the FSF, and the Apache, Eclipse, and Mozilla Foundations, to write up some "open spec licenses" for the community to debate. (2/2)
-
-
-
Replying to @ahachete @_Mark_Atwood and
Oh, but there are already so many open spec / standard licenses to choose from! I suspect more than standards bodies!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.