Revert features for minor

[sosukesuzuki]

Description

I'm now preparing for the 2.3.1 release. Some new feature implementations have already been included in the main branch. These features should be released as minor, not as a patch. So this PR reverts commits that adds these features for now.

I'll revert this PR after the release of 2.3.1.

new features that is reverted by this PR:

• f8cb785

Checklist

• I’ve read the contributing guidelines.

✨Try the playground for this PR✨

[fisker]

__babel_estree is just a internal parser. And the .stylelintrc format can be included IMO.

[sosukesuzuki]

Okay I'll cancel to revert __bable_estree. But about .stylelintrc, it should be released as minor. Because for example a user use prettier . --write, Prettier now formats stylelintrc just after a patch update. Many people will not like this.

[fisker]

PR to reverse back? We can keep it open for a while.

[fisker]

I don't understand, why don't you use path-release branch?

[sosukesuzuki]

I don't understand, why don't you use path-release branch?

Because there were many commits to be released. I decided that it would be easier to revert these commits once they were done.

[sosukesuzuki]

But however, I do not believe that the method I took was the best. I think there is room for improvement in the flow of the patch release.

[thorn0]

1. Commit reverts like this and other necessary changes to the patch-release branch
2. Do a release from that branch
3. Merge the branch to main

I don't see anything bad about this flow.

update: okay, after thinking more about it. I see that you'd have to revert the revert anyway, so it doesn't matter whether the branch was used. Sorry.

[thorn0]

Looks like using the branch makes sense only if you cherry-pick the changes you want to release.

[fisker]

IMO, we are taking version number too serious. Just release as 2.4.0, not a big deal.

[thorn0]

At some point there was made a decision not to make releases too often (because every update of Prettier in a project leads to reformatting the code base) and focus on their quality instead. I can't find a link though.