gremlin-javascript is not org scoped but "tinkerpop:developers" has write access to it:
npm access ls-packages tinkerpop:developers What's the response for: npm access grant read-write tinkerpop:developers gremlin On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:42 PM, Jean-Baptiste Musso <jbmu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hmm. It looks like you can only grant access to team of developers for > @scoped package, but not for standard (unscoped) packages. > I can make the "tinkerpop" user owner of that "gremlin" package, if that > helps. > > Jean-Baptiste > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra < > jorgebaygon...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > 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 > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
