I have no objections to using "gremlin" since it sounds like we have ways to make sure users don't break in unclear ways. I'll give others a chance to respond and barring no additional discussion will get The Baptist added to the org in npm. i guess we can proceed to the next step from there.
On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra <jorgebaygon...@gmail.com> wrote: > Reusing the existing package name while adding a deprecation message, > sounds good to me then. > > Keep in mind we will be releasing both for 3.2.x and 3.3.x branches, so any > deprecation message should be for versions lower than 3.2. > > If all agree, the next step will be to add jbmusso to tinkerpop org on npm > and add him to the "developers" team. I can't do it, as I'm not an "owner" > of the organization. > Once you have the proper access rights, you should grant write access to > package "tinkerpop:developers". > > Thanks, > Jorge > > > On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Jean-Baptiste Musso <jbmu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > npm (and yarn) now freeze versions aggressively in package.json and > > package-lock.json or yarn.lock, respectively. Publishing a new version on > > the v3.y.z (v.3.3.2) shouldn't be a concern for most users since, > luckily, > > I never published past the 2.y.z major version on npm. > > > > What I'm thinking is that we could add a deprecation message that users > > will see when installing all releases prior to using v3.3.2 when it's > > published. https://docs.npmjs.com/cli/deprecate should be helpful. > > > > I don't think that will break anything unless people added "gremlin": "*" > > in their package.json, but I guess very few people did that. What will > > break is example in live docs, such as Microsoft Azure CosmosDB, where > > installation requirements are "npm install gremlin": this will install > > v3.3.2, and break things. The quick fix for them is to update their doc > to > > "npm install gremlin@v2" - that should work. > > > > I also need to deprecate "gremlin-javascript" on npm (that lib still gets > > downloaded!), since I was pushing using this name before I was donated > the > > "gremlin" package name (I think 2-3 years ago). That'll be the second > time > > this package name is transferred, actually - back in the days, it was a > > Node.js/JVM bridge using node-java. > > > > Another option is to publish under "@tinkerpop/gremlin", but I think it's > > best if we can force people to no longer use the current "gremlin" > package, > > and use the official GLV, also under that same name. Having many package > > names will add a lot of confusion in the next month/years, and I think > it's > > best to risk breaking few things in the short term rather than adding *a > > lot* of confusion on the long term. > > > > Jean-Baptiste > > > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 1:32 PM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > It stinks that we would break 3K+ downloads. I don't know the npm > > > environment too well. Can a break be expected for people? The current > > > version of https://www.npmjs.com/package/gremlin is at 2.6.0 and we > > would > > > publish at 3.x which people could expect as a breaking change, no? > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 9:54 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra < > > > jorgebaygon...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > Now that the JavaScript GLV has been merged, it will be nice to have > an > > > > official pre-release (RC / beta) on the npm package manager as soon > as > > > > possible to allow users to start giving it a try. > > > > > > > > The package name identifier in the package.json is currently > > > > gremlin-javascript <https://www.npmjs.com/package/gremlin-javascript > >, > > > > which is under the tinkerpop organization created by Stephen: > > > > https://www.npmjs.com/org/tinkerpop > > > > npm orgs are a nice feature as it let's you handle the team members > > that > > > > can be collaborators (publish versions). > > > > > > > > Jean-Baptiste offered > > > > <https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/695#issuecomment-358482362 > > > > to > > > > transfer ownership of gremlin <https://www.npmjs.com/package/gremlin > > > > > > package to TinkerPop, so we can publish the GLV under that package > > name. > > > My > > > > only concern would be to break the functionality for current users, > as > > > the > > > > existent package has 3K downloads per month. I would prefer to > include > > a > > > > message on the gremlin package explaining the difference with > > > > gremlin-javascript (or recommending the GLV for future development), > > but > > > I > > > > don't feel strongly either way. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Jorge > > > > > > > > > >
