move to pact-foundation org/scope

pact-foundation / jest-pact

A Pact adaptor for to allow you to easily run tests with Jest

https://pact.io

MIT License

81 stars 12 forks source link

move to pact-foundation org/scope #207

Closed YOU54F closed 2 years ago

YOU54F commented 2 years ago

Currently this package is publishing from my personal npm account, makes sense to get it publishing under the pact-foundation

[X] create pact-foundation org in npm

Other tasks will be picked up under https://github.com/pact-foundation/jest-pact/issues/208 for the move to GH actions

YOU54F commented 2 years ago

Screenshot 2022-03-17 at 20 40 51

Looks like its already under the pact-foundation org in npm, but not scoped.

If we do scope, we may want to do the same with https://github.com/pact-foundation/mocha-pact

Thoughts anyone?

TimothyJones commented 2 years ago

I think pact-foundation is still just an npm user- there isn’t actually an org. It would be worth converting it to an org, since it’s not really a person.

YOU54F commented 2 years ago

Agreed! Looks like it's easy enough to do as well

https://docs.npmjs.com/converting-your-user-account-to-an-organization

What are your thoughts on moving to a @pact-foundation scope?

YOU54F commented 2 years ago

Agreed! Looks like it's easy enough to do as well

https://docs.npmjs.com/converting-your-user-account-to-an-organization

I’ll get a canny roadmap ticket up to track this, as there will actually be a few tasks to consider and it’s worth taking the time to flesh them out

TimothyJones commented 2 years ago

What are your thoughts on moving to a @pact-foundation scope?

I previously intentionally didn't do this, so that it would sort with other jest-related packages in package.json. My thinking was that it's idomatic for jest plugins / extensions to be jest-*, and it's likely that someone migrating away from Jest would want to keep pact. I don't feel strongly about it though.

For me, the arguments are:

Consistency with Jest extensions is reasonable, so jest-pact is an appropriate name
Consistency with other pact npm packages is also reasonable, so @pact-foundation/jest-pact is an appropriate name (although maybe @pact-foundation/jest-extensions is better - since pact is already in the name?)

I don't feel strongly.

I think that churning on the name will inconvenience some users, and doing it just so that it's under @pact-foundation isn't necessarily worth that pain.

I do think it's worth releasing a v1, since the interface is now pretty stable.

YOU54F commented 2 years ago

I think I am inclined to stick with jest-pact for the reasons outlined above.

My thinking was that it's idomatic for jest plugins / extensions to be jest-*

Yeah, that is how I felt when I initially named it, looking at other plugins in the jest ecosystem

I think that churning on the name will inconvenience some users, and doing it just so that it's under @pact-foundation isn't necessarily worth that pain.

This is a very fair point

I do think it's worth releasing a v1, since the interface is now pretty stable.

Nod.

We have the pact-foundation org now set up thanks to @mefellows