I really think that we need to get as many of the GLV test issues resolved as possible before the release. I'm not so sure we've even created issues for all the failures at this point. Some problems haven't even been classified yet to create a proper issue. I'm going to try to spend some time on that today. I will addrf Fix Versions to things I think should close in time for release so that we have an idea as to what needs work:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20TINKERPOP%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20(3.2.8%2C%203.3.2)%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20key%20ASC I'm not sure if that's truly everything we need done, but I figure that this is a good start. I would also love to see us merge this: https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/766 Even if we can't implement a ton of GLV examples this would still be awesome. Unfortunately only some of us can get docker to build docs appropriately at this point, so that issue needs some resolution. We probably need a new thread to discuss "release issues" but if any of you have other ideas for what needs to get done and what doesn't please update JIRA or make a case for what you're thinking here. Thanks! On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 2:58 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra <jorgebaygon...@gmail.com> wrote: > First week of April sounds good to me. > > On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Ok - i was just asking for clarity because this thread started as a > > discussion on a "beta" release. > > > > Our last release was in december, so I suppose it would be time to get > > another one out. I do have a number of issues I'd like to complete for > > these versions - can we tentatively say that we release first week of > > April? That would give us about four more weeks of development > (opportunity > > to fix more GLV tests across the board plus the other issues I'd like to > > see done) plus a week of code freeze. is that a good target? > > > > On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 3:20 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra < > > jorgebaygon...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > 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 > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
