Skip to content

Conversation

@erisu
Copy link
Member

@erisu erisu commented Apr 2, 2020

  • Added @cordova/eslint-config dependency
  • Applied lint fixes
  • Added manual changes to fix lint warnings.

@erisu erisu added this to the 3.0 milestone Apr 2, 2020
Copy link
Member

@NiklasMerz NiklasMerz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I did not read every line but changes look good. Tests pass locally and in CI 👍

Copy link
Contributor

@raphinesse raphinesse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just peeked in and left a few comments. Definitely too many changes for me to review properly right now 😅

Would definitely be good to have this repo linted too.

return extension;
for (var extension in FILETYPE_BY_EXTENSION) {
if (FILETYPE_BY_EXTENSION.hasOwnProperty(unquoted(extension))) {
if (FILETYPE_BY_EXTENSION[unquoted(extension)] === unquoted(filetype)) { return extension; }
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ugh, why does the auto-fix format that onto one line 😒 There are a few instances of changes like this. No deal breakers but not pretty either.


for (var index = 0; index < dependencyTargets.length; index++) {
var dependencyTargetUuid = dependencyTargets[index];
for (var index2 = 0; index2 < dependencyTargets.length; index2++) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Violations like these would disappear later when transforming var to let. Having index2 as a variable name could be irritating.

Copy link

@brody4hire brody4hire left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My apologies for the late review. I have a feeling that changing one thing at a time in separate PRs would introduce extra code churn not needed in the master branch. I would personally favor making one PR per source (or test) module.

I am also not so thrilled about combining package-lock.json with this PR.

Thanks @erisu for all of your hard work on this, apologies for the difficulty.

@erisu erisu modified the milestones: 3.0, 4.0 Apr 6, 2020
@erisu
Copy link
Member Author

erisu commented Apr 8, 2020

Closing PR.

  • This PR Will not make it for major release.
  • This PR was not fully reviewed.
  • Requests for this PR, on opinions, has invalidated this entire PR.

Also making a note that this PR never commited package-lock.json.

@erisu erisu closed this Apr 8, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants