I'm referring to an official release of all artifacts for versions 3.2.8 and 3.3.2. The JavaScript GLV has been reviewed and merged, the test suite is in good shape. This GLV has been in the pipeline for a long time now, I think we should make the last effort for it to be generally available.
BTW, npm fixed the issue for the gremlin package: https://www.npmjs.com/org/tinkerpop On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 11:03 PM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> wrote: > You're referring to a gremlin-javascript release candidate and not to a > general official release of all artifacts (java, .net, etc) for > 3.3.2/3.2.8), right? > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 9:57 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra < > jorgebaygon...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > 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 > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > >> > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
