I've discovered the Cordova project publishes all their project repos
without the `apache-` prefix.
https://www.npmjs.com/search?q=cordova

Same goes for thrift (https://www.npmjs.com/package/thrift). I've
guess there's precedence that maybe this isn't an issue?

On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 at 18:17, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Most or all of the Apache projects that are distributed on Homebrew
> <https://brew.sh/> are named apache-foo.
>
> ...except for `wsk` and `wskdeploy` which are curiously lacking
> `apache-` prefixes as well. ;)
>
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 at 12:08, Matt Rutkowski <mrutk...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > I too like the dash approach unless Apache likes having a domain name
> > style which implies (family) membership hierarchy.
> >
> >
> >
> > From:   Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
> > To:     dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> > Date:   07/15/2019 12:05 PM
> > Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: Changing JavaScript SDK NPM Module Name:
> > openwhisk => apache-openwhisk?
> >
> >
> >
> > The name with the dash looks nicer, agreed. In migrating from an old
> > package name to a new one where you already have existing users, I
> > haven't seen a solution to that myself quite yet, though I know that
> > Groovy has a similar problem where their packages are still published
> > under the `org.codehaus.groovy` group id instead of
> > `org.apache.groovy`. While Maven and NPM are quite different, the
> > method of migrating a package name is similarly not well-defined in
> > both systems.
> >
> > Does anyone have more info about how NPM runs their repository? Maybe
> > they can add in some redirects of some sort.
> >
> > On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 at 11:11, James Thomas <jthomas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Reviewing the ASF guidelines on NPM packages to check our JS SDK
> > satifises
> > > all the rules[1] - we're supposed to be publishing the NPM package as
> > > "apacheopenwhisk" and not "openwhisk". This NPM library was published at
> > (
> > >
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.npmjs.com_package_openwhisk&d=DwIBaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=6zQLM7Gc0Sv1iwayKOKa4_SFxRIxS478q2gZlAJj4Zw&m=NilRlnhMriE1MNYQW3S_Ni47FW8uu-CTsXNbM3FYkH8&s=C-3wIDNjUO6k1tpWW7WQA9d4c-lbe7KshNS1jAR6jxM&e=
> > ) before the project was donated to
> > > Apache.
> > >
> > > Moving from the library to publish at `apache-openwhisk` rather than
> > > `openwhisk`[2] is not technically challenging (and the new package name
> > is
> > > available) but will cause numerous issues....
> > >
> > > I'm asking for comments on what to do about this. Would like to engage
> > the
> > > ASF mentors for advice as well. What does the community think about
> > this?
> > >
> > > The library has significant usage (NPM tells me the library is averaging
> > 6k
> > > downloads a week) using the existing package name. GitHub lists 38K
> > > references to the module.
> > >
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_search-3Fq-3Drequire-2528-2522openwhisk-2522-2529-26type-3DCode&d=DwIBaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=6zQLM7Gc0Sv1iwayKOKa4_SFxRIxS478q2gZlAJj4Zw&m=NilRlnhMriE1MNYQW3S_Ni47FW8uu-CTsXNbM3FYkH8&s=nIOIJxXhbd1TkXzWJVHx9-NAMQV4JuBsXbm1pEkX8u0&e=
> >
> > >
> > > All those external dependent projects, blog posts, documentation and
> > > tutorials, etc, that reference the library (and are outside of our
> > control)
> > > will be reliant on the old package name. These will still work (as the
> > old
> > > library version will still be available from NPM) but never receive new
> > > versions on installing the dependency. This may eventually mean the old
> > > library doesn't work with future platform changes and/or lead to
> > security
> > > issues with outdated dependencies.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure if there's any leeway in the allowing the short-name for
> > the
> > > NPM library (given we follow all the other requirements)? This will be a
> > > significant amount of work just changing all the references in project
> > we
> > > control.
> > >
> > > If we do change the name - I'd assume `apache-openwhisk` is fine. Using
> > > `apacheopenwhisk` is slightly horrid....
> > >
> > > [1] -
> > >
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__cwiki.apache.org_confluence_pages_viewpage.action-3FpageId-3D109454613&d=DwIBaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=6zQLM7Gc0Sv1iwayKOKa4_SFxRIxS478q2gZlAJj4Zw&m=NilRlnhMriE1MNYQW3S_Ni47FW8uu-CTsXNbM3FYkH8&s=ZshMeW40IVmdVpBrfK3b_ERcnaA4Bh7h3iqXvO_NDCc&e=
> >
> > > [2] - following NPM JS module conventions - apache-openwhisk is much
> > > preferable than a single word (apacheopenwhisk).
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > James Thomas
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>



-- 
Regards,
James Thomas

Reply via email to