I forgot to add: Stephen mentioned using the name "@tinkerpop/gremlin"
thanks to npmjs.org support for @scoped/ packages.
This is neat because part of gremlin-javascript official GLV could also be
published as other modules under that same namespace, such as
@tinkerpop/graphson, etc., so people could only consume these (helps with
bundle size for browser environments). Not strictly needed right now but
could be useful in the future.

Jean-Baptiste

On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Thanks for offering the "gremlin" name up for use. Does anyone think we
> should stick with "gremlin-javascript" as opposed to just "gremlin" (this
> of course refers to npm naming - our project module will still be
> gremlin-javascript in our code base).
>
> I hope the CosmosDB folks are subscribed to this list to follow along with
> development :) but if not perhaps you could direct them to this thread so
> that they are aware of what's is being discussed.
>
> Good to know that we don't have trouble with versioning. I really would
> like all things TinkerPop to be released on the same version number.
> Ideally the first release of gremlin-javascript should go into play for
> 3.3.2/3.2.8.
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Jean-Baptiste Musso <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi TinkerPop,
> >
> > With the recent work on gremlin-javascript by Jorge [1], I see no reason
> > for the "gremlin" package currently published on npmjs.org [2] to
> continue
> > to exist as a distinct project. Newcomers would be so confused, and I
> don't
> > think fragmentation is a good idea here. I think it should be replaced by
> > the official gremlin-javascript GLV that is being developed here. I'm ok
> to
> > transfer/donate the "gremlin" package name to the Apache TinkerPop
> project
> > if we think it's a good idea to use that name.
> >
> > However, the current "gremlin" JS package has been mentioned by some
> > implementers (Microsoft Azure CosmosDB [3]), so maybe we want to sync
> with
> > them first so they get a chance to update their documentation/examples
> > considering there will be several breaking changes. Maybe I can help on
> > that.
> >
> > Also, there shouldn't be issues with versions since I only published on
> the
> > v2.x branch there (npmjs package versions are basically immutable). The
> GLV
> > can safely be published there as 3.3.x and 3.2.x once ready. I think I
> can
> > flag previously published versions as "deprecated" so people get soft
> > warnings when attempting to install these, encouraging them to upgrade to
> > the official GLV (need to check that).
> >
> > Jean-Baptiste
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/695
> > [2] npmjs.com/package/gremlin
> > [3] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cosmos-db/create-graph-nodejs
> >
>

Reply via email to