Getting a 403 Forbidden error:

$ npm access grant read-write tinkerpop:developers gremlin
npm http request PUT
https://registry.npmjs.org/-/team/tinkerpop/developers/package
npm http 403 https://registry.npmjs.org/-/team/tinkerpop/developers/package
npm ERR! code E403
npm ERR! Forbidden : -/team/tinkerpop/developers/package

Also:

$ npm whoami
npm http request GET https://registry.npmjs.org/-/whoami
npm http 200 https://registry.npmjs.org/-/whoami
jbmusso

Funny, I got confused in my previous posts and just realized that: I was
prettier sure I owned gremlin-javascript, but I used to publish
under gremlin-client.

Jean-Baptiste

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:55 PM, Jorge Bay Gondra <jorgebaygon...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to