New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
ESLint v9 compatibility #78
Comments
@karlhorky thanks for testing it with eslint v9! Indeed there are some BC that have to be addressed in order to support v9. If you like you are welcome to create a PR to fix this piece of code but it should be done in backwards compatible way just like they show in example, so we can keep supporting all previous eslint versions. Also if you decide to make a PR it would be necessary to update CI workflows to test this rule against both eslint v8 and v9, just like we already do with previous versions. But if you are not comfortable doing it no worries, I can adjust it on your PR as well 😊 |
Did some initial work on the v9 support but in general it's not possible to use it due to upstream dependencies not supporting it yet. |
typescript-eslint are at least preparing for it now, but this lib may need to also upgrade https://typescript-eslint.io/blog/announcing-typescript-eslint-v7/ They are dropping support for older typescript, node and eslint versions in that major (but otherwise it is unchanged). I look into adding support here for 6.x and 7.x at the same time, but I'm not sure that can work nicely without being a breaking change, due to how npm resolution works. As long as this library itself wants to support older eslint and node versions than typescript-eslint 7.x I'm not sure we can just add 7.x to the list of supported versions next to 6.x? |
Another data point: |
How is work going forward? This is blocking us from upgrading to eslint v9 and we cant already upgrade |
Currently, using
eslint@9.0.0-alpha.0
,eslint-plugin-deprecation
fails with the following error:It looks like there's a blog post about preparing rules for ESLint v9 here:
From a quick look, it appears that
context.sourceCode.getAncestors(node)
should be used instead.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: