[SPARK-50586][BUILD] Use CommonJS format for ESLint configuration file#49198
Closed
sarutak wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
Closed
[SPARK-50586][BUILD] Use CommonJS format for ESLint configuration file#49198sarutak wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
sarutak wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
Conversation
HyukjinKwon
approved these changes
Dec 16, 2024
Member
Author
|
I don't think the CI failure is relevant to this change. |
MaxGekk
approved these changes
Dec 19, 2024
Member
|
+1, LGTM. Merging to master. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This PR proposes to use CommonJS format for ESLint configuration file instead of JSON format.
Why are the changes needed?
CommonJS format is just plain JavaScript so we can add comments to the configuration file.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
Temporarily modified some
.jsfiles and randev/lint-js, then the linter detected violations.Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No.