openwhisk-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Re: Changing JavaScript SDK NPM Module Name: openwhisk => apache-openwhisk?
Date Wed, 17 Jul 2019 17:08:15 GMT
It’s likely a topic that is brought up by the board once in a while for
those projects.

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 12:06, James Thomas <jthomas.uk@gmail.com> wrote:

> I've discovered the Cordova project publishes all their project repos
> without the `apache-` prefix.
> https://www.npmjs.com/search?q=cordova
>
> Same goes for thrift (https://www.npmjs.com/package/thrift). I've
> guess there's precedence that maybe this isn't an issue?
>
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 at 18:17, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Most or all of the Apache projects that are distributed on Homebrew
> > <https://brew.sh/> are named apache-foo.
> >
> > ...except for `wsk` and `wskdeploy` which are curiously lacking
> > `apache-` prefixes as well. ;)
> >
> > On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 at 12:08, Matt Rutkowski <mrutkows@us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > I too like the dash approach unless Apache likes having a domain name
> > > style which implies (family) membership hierarchy.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From:   Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
> > > To:     dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> > > Date:   07/15/2019 12:05 PM
> > > Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: Changing JavaScript SDK NPM Module Name:
> > > openwhisk => apache-openwhisk?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The name with the dash looks nicer, agreed. In migrating from an old
> > > package name to a new one where you already have existing users, I
> > > haven't seen a solution to that myself quite yet, though I know that
> > > Groovy has a similar problem where their packages are still published
> > > under the `org.codehaus.groovy` group id instead of
> > > `org.apache.groovy`. While Maven and NPM are quite different, the
> > > method of migrating a package name is similarly not well-defined in
> > > both systems.
> > >
> > > Does anyone have more info about how NPM runs their repository? Maybe
> > > they can add in some redirects of some sort.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 at 11:11, James Thomas <jthomas.uk@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Reviewing the ASF guidelines on NPM packages to check our JS SDK
> > > satifises
> > > > all the rules[1] - we're supposed to be publishing the NPM package as
> > > > "apacheopenwhisk" and not "openwhisk". This NPM library was
> published at
> > > (
> > > >
> > >
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.npmjs.com_package_openwhisk&d=DwIBaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=6zQLM7Gc0Sv1iwayKOKa4_SFxRIxS478q2gZlAJj4Zw&m=NilRlnhMriE1MNYQW3S_Ni47FW8uu-CTsXNbM3FYkH8&s=C-3wIDNjUO6k1tpWW7WQA9d4c-lbe7KshNS1jAR6jxM&e=
> > > ) before the project was donated to
> > > > Apache.
> > > >
> > > > Moving from the library to publish at `apache-openwhisk` rather than
> > > > `openwhisk`[2] is not technically challenging (and the new package
> name
> > > is
> > > > available) but will cause numerous issues....
> > > >
> > > > I'm asking for comments on what to do about this. Would like to
> engage
> > > the
> > > > ASF mentors for advice as well. What does the community think about
> > > this?
> > > >
> > > > The library has significant usage (NPM tells me the library is
> averaging
> > > 6k
> > > > downloads a week) using the existing package name. GitHub lists 38K
> > > > references to the module.
> > > >
> > >
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_search-3Fq-3Drequire-2528-2522openwhisk-2522-2529-26type-3DCode&d=DwIBaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=6zQLM7Gc0Sv1iwayKOKa4_SFxRIxS478q2gZlAJj4Zw&m=NilRlnhMriE1MNYQW3S_Ni47FW8uu-CTsXNbM3FYkH8&s=nIOIJxXhbd1TkXzWJVHx9-NAMQV4JuBsXbm1pEkX8u0&e=
> > >
> > > >
> > > > All those external dependent projects, blog posts, documentation and
> > > > tutorials, etc, that reference the library (and are outside of our
> > > control)
> > > > will be reliant on the old package name. These will still work (as
> the
> > > old
> > > > library version will still be available from NPM) but never receive
> new
> > > > versions on installing the dependency. This may eventually mean the
> old
> > > > library doesn't work with future platform changes and/or lead to
> > > security
> > > > issues with outdated dependencies.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure if there's any leeway in the allowing the short-name for
> > > the
> > > > NPM library (given we follow all the other requirements)? This will
> be a
> > > > significant amount of work just changing all the references in
> project
> > > we
> > > > control.
> > > >
> > > > If we do change the name - I'd assume `apache-openwhisk` is fine.
> Using
> > > > `apacheopenwhisk` is slightly horrid....
> > > >
> > > > [1] -
> > > >
> > >
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__cwiki.apache.org_confluence_pages_viewpage.action-3FpageId-3D109454613&d=DwIBaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=6zQLM7Gc0Sv1iwayKOKa4_SFxRIxS478q2gZlAJj4Zw&m=NilRlnhMriE1MNYQW3S_Ni47FW8uu-CTsXNbM3FYkH8&s=ZshMeW40IVmdVpBrfK3b_ERcnaA4Bh7h3iqXvO_NDCc&e=
> > >
> > > > [2] - following NPM JS module conventions - apache-openwhisk is much
> > > > preferable than a single word (apacheopenwhisk).
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Regards,
> > > > James Thomas
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> James Thomas
>
-- 
Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message