Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
84 lines (49 loc) · 3.88 KB

2019-06-20.md

File metadata and controls

84 lines (49 loc) · 3.88 KB
Raw

2019-June-20 ESLint TSC Meeting Notes

Transcript

https://gitter.im/eslint/tsc-meetings/archives/2019/06/20

Attending

  • Teddy Katz (@not-an-aardvark) - TSC
  • Toru Nagashima (@mysticatea) - TSC
  • Kai Cataldo (@kaicataldo) - TSC
  • Ilya Volodin (@ilyavolodin) - TSC
  • Kevin Partington (@platinumazure) - TSC

Additionally, the following individuals are not in attendance but support consensus:

  • Nicholas C. Zakas (@nzakas) - TSC
  • Gyandeep Singh (@gyandeeps) - TSC

Topics

Docs: Fixes incorrect example

Summary:

This PR was created due to confusion around the intersection of (1) how ESLint rule options work generally, and (2) the specific option schema for this rule, which is a variadic list that comes after the severity. This lead to user confusion (about whether "error" was a restricted global vs a severity). This PR definitely makes the documentation for this rule more clear, but there's a concern about whether this sets a precedent (i.e., whether we also need to update all rule docs to remind users about the severity option).

Question:

  1. Should we accept this PR?
  2. Should we establish a working group, or otherwise take on a task to improve information architecture around rule severity as part of (yet distinct from) rule options?
  • @ilyavolodin is concerned about fixing this as a one-off rather than a header for all rules, and believes the rule's options signature should change.
  • @mysticatea suggests enhancing syntax highlighting to improve the clarity of rule documentation.
  • @ilyavolodin suggests that we enhance the rule page template to include a blurb about rule severity configuration.

Resolution:

  • The resolution is to not accept this PR but to instead enhance the rule page template to include a blurb about rule severity configuration.
  • 👍 @not-an-aardvark, @kaicataldo, @ilyavolodin, @mysticatea, @platinumazure

Add CodeTriage badge to eslint/eslint

Question:

Should we accept this PR?

  • @kaicataldo, @ilyavolodin, @platinumazure have questions around the program
  • @platinumazure suggests we shelve this discussion and ask for more information.

Resolution:

  • The resolution is to shelve this discussion until after we ask for more information.
  • 👍 @not-an-aardvark, @kaicataldo, @ilyavolodin, @mysticatea, @platinumazure

Should we begin stable releases of ESLint v6.0.0?

Question:

It seems like there haven't been any major problems reported with the v6 prereleases. Should we make tomorrow's release the first stable v6.0.0 release?

Resolution:

  • The resolution is to begin stable releases of ESLint v6.0.0.
  • 👍 @not-an-aardvark, @kaicataldo, @ilyavolodin, @mysticatea, @platinumazure

Should we deploy the site to Netlify?

Question:

Should I move forward with Netlify? At this point, I'm ready and able to create the open source team and can reach out to the JSF to see how we would go about pointing the domain to the Netlify hosted version. eslint/archive-website#576 (comment)

  • @ilyavolodin suggests using the secondary deploy as a playground to allow us to take our time with the site redesign (instead of having to do it all at once).
  • @not-an-aardvark and @kaicataldo are in favor of decoupling the deploy to Netlify and the site redesign.

Resolution:

  • The resolution is to move to Netlify.
  • 👍 @not-an-aardvark, @kaicataldo, @ilyavolodin, @mysticatea, @platinumazure

Scheduled release for June 21st, 2019

Resolution: Due to team members' availability not lining up, the team will figure this out offline.