Skip to content
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 parity with the Browsertrix repo #288

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 8, 2024
Merged

Conversation

emma-sg
Copy link
Member

@emma-sg emma-sg commented Mar 8, 2024

This copies the rules from the Browsertrix repo, and uses suppress-eslint-errors to suppose the violations. I'll take a pass at cleaning this up at some point in the future, and let's do our best to address these in the future as we come across them :)

This'll help ensure new code being added to this repo is held to the same standard as code in Browsertrix's frontend.

@emma-sg emma-sg requested review from ikreymer and SuaYoo March 8, 2024 01:05
@emma-sg emma-sg self-assigned this Mar 8, 2024
@emma-sg emma-sg changed the base branch from main to dev-2.0.0 March 8, 2024 01:08
@emma-sg
Copy link
Member Author

emma-sg commented Mar 8, 2024

This doesn't touch any actually code, it just adds comments, so I'm just gonna merge this so this doesn't block anything

@emma-sg emma-sg merged commit 40d84f3 into dev-2.0.0 Mar 8, 2024
6 checks passed
@emma-sg emma-sg deleted the emma/eslint-parity branch March 8, 2024 01:12
emma-sg added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 8, 2024
Follow-up from #288 

This matches the strictness rules with the Browsertrix repo,
specifically `noImplicitAny`, and then adds `// @ts-expect-error`s to
suppress existing errors this change raises. This'll help us keep code
quality high moving forward.

Going to just directly merge this once it passes CI; as with #288, this
doesn't change any code, just comments.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant