Jean-Baptiste, could you grant tinkerpop:developers team access to the gremlin package?
Once we all have access, it would be nice to have a beta release of 3.2.8/3.3.2 as soon as possible, to allow users to start giving it a try. There aren't any others tickets in JIRA affecting the javascript GLV that I could find. It has been a long road for the GLV but being an scripting language, I expect it to be easier to maintain than the C# GLV :) If there aren't any blockers, it would be nice to start discussing a timeline for 3.2.8/3.3.2. Cheers, Jorge On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 1:43 PM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've added The Baptist to the the org in npm - all done > > On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 12:20 PM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > 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 > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
