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

Do not declare wp-prettier as a dependency of @wordpress/eslint-plugin #39208

Closed
nicholasio opened this issue Mar 4, 2022 · 11 comments · Fixed by #39244
Closed

Do not declare wp-prettier as a dependency of @wordpress/eslint-plugin #39208

nicholasio opened this issue Mar 4, 2022 · 11 comments · Fixed by #39244
Assignees
Labels
Needs Dev Ready for, and needs developer efforts [Package] ESLint plugin /packages/eslint-plugin [Type] Code Quality Issues or PRs that relate to code quality
Projects

Comments

@nicholasio
Copy link

nicholasio commented Mar 4, 2022

What problem does this address?

Currently, the @wordpress/eslint-plugin is declaring the WordPress fork of prettier as direct dependency and therefore making the wrong assumption that every project using that package is going to use WP fork of prettier.

At 10up, we have our own build tool similar to wp-scripts but we do not use wp-prettier, we use prettier original implementation. Our eslint config exports a wordpress config that makes use of the custom @wordpress eslint rules but depending on @wordpress/eslint-plugin causes some issues (from npm ERESOLVE warnings to errors in some versions of npm) due to conflicting dependencies of prettier.

IMO prettier and wp-prettier have nothing to do with @wordpress/eslint-plugin and it should be up to the consumers of the plugin to decide how they want to format their code.

What is your proposed solution?

Remove wp-prettier from package.json in the eslint-plugin package

"prettier": "npm:wp-prettier@2.2.1-beta-1",
and have wp-scripts declare prettier's fork as a direct dependency.

@gziolo
Copy link
Member

gziolo commented Mar 4, 2022

In theory, we could make Prettier a peer dependency and mark it as optional. It would be similar to what we did for TypeScript:

"peerDependenciesMeta": {
"typescript": {
"optional": true
}
},

if ( isPackageInstalled( 'typescript' ) ) {

We need to evaluate what implications that would have. Many projects use only @wordpress/eslint-plugin so they probably don't install explicitly prettier in any form. In the case when someone using it indirectly with @wordpress/scripts it would probably work exactly the same as today.

In general, working with this Prettier's fork has been painful for quite some time as reported in #21872. I shared a proposal so we stop using the fork in WordPress/Gutenberg some time ago: https://make.wordpress.org/core/2022/01/05/proposal-changes-to-javascript-coding-standards-for-full-prettier-compatibility/.

I updated my test repository today that uses @wordpress/scripts and I had to explicitly install this fork when using npm 8 so it doesn't use the regular Prettier:

https://github.com/gziolo/wp-block-directory-template/blob/2ed0d0f0e1a34a18850f0ef794b9714df5a9dd4e/package.json#L27

I saw some warnings because of that ...

IMO prettier and wp-prettier have nothing to do with @wordpress/eslint-plugin and it should be up to the consumers of the plugin to decide how they want to format their code.

Actually, I have to disagree here for the context of WordPress. We use Prettier + ESLint integration to enforce WordPress JavaScript conventions. Anyway, I agree that we can make it more flexible as noted above.

@gziolo gziolo added [Package] ESLint plugin /packages/eslint-plugin [Type] Code Quality Issues or PRs that relate to code quality labels Mar 4, 2022
@gziolo gziolo added this to To do in Core JS Mar 4, 2022
@gziolo gziolo added the Needs Dev Ready for, and needs developer efforts label Mar 4, 2022
@nicholasio
Copy link
Author

nicholasio commented Mar 4, 2022

I thought about the peerDep and making it optional. I just wasn't sure how NPM would handle an optional dep with name of prettier and a different version when other packages also require the same dep name but with a different version.

I believe the optional dep idea would be easier if we could tell eslint to use a different prettier binary (unsure if this is possible) .That way you could declare two optional peer deps: wp-prettier (which would expose a wp-prettier bin) and prettier.

@ocean90
Copy link
Member

ocean90 commented Mar 4, 2022

I updated my test repository today that uses @wordpress/scripts and I had to explicitly install this fork when using npm 8 so it doesn't use the regular Prettier:

Just confirming that npm 7/8 currently do not resolve aliases defined in dependencies. I have also started to add the alias to the main package.json. Gutenberg itself has also defined it for a long time already.

Related: npm/cli#4197, npm/cli#2800

@gziolo
Copy link
Member

gziolo commented Mar 4, 2022

Gutenberg itself has also defined it for a long time already.

It worked way much better with npm 6, but sometimes it was problematic in Gutenberg so we enforced it to avoid issues. In my testing with npm 6 these npm aliases worked quite well but we had reports about issues.

@nicholasio
Copy link
Author

as FYI this is what npm ls look like for prettier when using npm 8 on 10up-toolkit. I've had reports where npm install completely fails when using npm 7. npm 8 just gives an ERESOLVE warning.

image

If consumers of @wordpress/eslint-plugin are already having issues with the alias and are having to add the alias manually I'm guessing we could just remove the alias from @wordpress/eslint-plugin?

@gziolo
Copy link
Member

gziolo commented Mar 5, 2022

If consumers of @wordpress/eslint-plugin are already having issues with the alias and are having to add the alias manually I'm guessing we could just remove the alias from @wordpress/eslint-plugin?

I think we should just mark a regular prettier as peerDependency that is optional. The remaining question is whether it is still going to be installed with npm 8 because it's marked as a peer dependency for eslint-plugin-prettier. Maybe we would have to mark eslint-plugin-prettier as an optional peer dependency as well.

@nicholasio
Copy link
Author

nicholasio commented Mar 5, 2022

If consumers of @wordpress/eslint-plugin are already having issues with the alias and are having to add the alias manually I'm guessing we could just remove the alias from @wordpress/eslint-plugin?

I think we should just mark a regular prettier as peerDependency that is optional. The remaining question is whether it is still going to be installed with npm 8 because it's marked as a peer dependency for eslint-plugin-prettier. Maybe we would have to mark eslint-plugin-prettier as an optional peer dependency as well.

That makes sense to me re: including eslint-plugin-prettier as optional peer dependency.

@gziolo
Copy link
Member

gziolo commented Mar 7, 2022

I opened #39244 to make prettier integration optional in the ESLint plugin. I'm still not sure whether eslint-plugin-prettier needs to be moved to peer dependencies as well, but we will find out soon.

@gziolo gziolo moved this from To do to In progress in Core JS Mar 7, 2022
@gziolo gziolo self-assigned this Mar 7, 2022
@gziolo gziolo added the [Status] In Progress Tracking issues with work in progress label Mar 7, 2022
@gziolo gziolo moved this from In progress to Done in Core JS Mar 11, 2022
@gziolo
Copy link
Member

gziolo commented Mar 11, 2022

@nicholasio, there is @wordpress/eslint-plugin@11.0.0 available with the fix. Can you check if that resolves the issue?

@nicholasio
Copy link
Author

@gziolo Thanks!

This solved the issue for me

image

@gziolo
Copy link
Member

gziolo commented Mar 11, 2022

@nicholasio, this is great news and thank you for reporting back 🎉

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Needs Dev Ready for, and needs developer efforts [Package] ESLint plugin /packages/eslint-plugin [Type] Code Quality Issues or PRs that relate to code quality
Projects
No open projects
Core JS
  
Done
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants