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

Change Request: Better support migrating JS config files #64

Open
1 of 5 tasks
nzakas opened this issue Jun 20, 2024 · 3 comments
Open
1 of 5 tasks

Change Request: Better support migrating JS config files #64

nzakas opened this issue Jun 20, 2024 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
accepted enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@nzakas
Copy link
Member

nzakas commented Jun 20, 2024

Which packages would you like to change?

  • @eslint/compat
  • @eslint/config-array
  • @eslint/migrate-config
  • @eslint/object-schema

What problem do you want to solve?

Right now, migrate-config just takes the evaluated version of a .eslintrc.js file and converts that. While that works fine for mostly static .eslintrc.js files, it's not a good solution for complicated ones.

What do you think is the correct solution?

Ideally, we'd be able to do some code modifications via something like jscodeshift to update a .eslintrc.js file. This would likely be a different code path than for static config files.

Participation

  • I am willing to submit a pull request for this change.

Additional comments

I don't have the bandwidth to take this on, so looking for a volunteer to investigate this.

@nzakas nzakas added the enhancement New feature or request label Jun 20, 2024
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this to Needs Triage in Triage Jun 20, 2024
@fasttime fasttime moved this from Needs Triage to Ready to Implement in Triage Jul 22, 2024
@nzakas
Copy link
Member Author

nzakas commented Jan 29, 2025

@fasttime are you still planning on working on this?

@fasttime
Copy link
Member

@nzakas I'm sorry for the delay in sharing an update. I was thinking that, since we're discussing some changes to the configuration system, some of which will be experimental at first, it might make sense to postpone upgrading the migration tool until we have a clearer idea of the new features. What are your thoughts on this?

@nzakas
Copy link
Member Author

nzakas commented Jan 30, 2025

I'm not sure that I'd consider the new features as blocking this work. We're already doing a good job with static config files, and applying to .js files is really the last piece. I'd imagine that one we have extends, we'd want to update this tool to use that anyway.

I do think other things you're working on (browser testing, concurrency) are higher priority than this, so no harm letting it sit a bit. I just don't think we should consider the config system changes to block this effort.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
accepted enhancement New feature or request
Projects
Status: Ready to Implement
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants