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

Remove ESLint no-shadow patch #10716

Closed
3 tasks
swissspidy opened this issue Feb 25, 2022 · 0 comments · Fixed by #10756
Closed
3 tasks

Remove ESLint no-shadow patch #10716

swissspidy opened this issue Feb 25, 2022 · 0 comments · Fixed by #10756
Assignees
Labels
Type: Code Quality Things that need a refactor, rewrite or just some good old developer ❤️ Type: Infrastructure Changes impacting testing infrastructure or build tooling

Comments

@swissspidy
Copy link
Collaborator

swissspidy commented Feb 25, 2022

Task Description

We have a custom patch for the ESLint no-shadow rule for a longstanding bug (eslint/eslint#12687).

This bug has finally been fixed (eslint/eslint#14963) so we can remove our patch now that is has been released as part of ESLint 8.10.0

Then we just need to enable the ignoreOnInitialization option for the no-shadow rule in our ESLint config and check whether there are no new lint errors being reported. Then we should be good to go!

  • Update ESLint
  • Enable ignoreOnInitialization
  • Address lint errors if needed
@swissspidy swissspidy added Type: Infrastructure Changes impacting testing infrastructure or build tooling Type: Code Quality Things that need a refactor, rewrite or just some good old developer ❤️ Pod: WP labels Feb 25, 2022
@timarney timarney self-assigned this Feb 28, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Type: Code Quality Things that need a refactor, rewrite or just some good old developer ❤️ Type: Infrastructure Changes impacting testing infrastructure or build tooling
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants