Hi, Regarding the npm issue, we created a ticket on the npm issue tracker: https://github.com/npm/registry/issues/281 and contacted support.
We are waiting for a response from them, but in any case if it takes to long for npm support to look at it, Jean-Baptiste could grant the individual members of tinkerpop:developers / release manager access, so that should not be blocking an official release of the JavaScript GLV. Can we start discussing a timeline for 3.2.8/3.3.2? Thanks, Jorge On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 10:23 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra <jorgebaygon...@gmail.com > wrote: > Any luck? > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 9:43 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra < > jorgebaygon...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> hm... that's weird... It's working on my end with a different package... >> >> Maybe use a newer npm cli version? >> >> If npm access is still failing after cli upgrade, you could use npm owner >> <https://docs.npmjs.com/cli/owner> to add any other tinkerpop member >> <https://www.npmjs.com/org/tinkerpop/members> as co-owner and we could >> try to run npm access from there. >> >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:55 PM, Jean-Baptiste Musso <jbmu...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> 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/-/t >>> eam/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/tin >>> kerpop/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 >>> > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > >> > > >>> > > > > >> > >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>> >> >> >
