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

fix: Don't require ESLint #25

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 9, 2024
Merged

fix: Don't require ESLint #25

merged 2 commits into from
Sep 9, 2024

Conversation

nzakas
Copy link
Member

@nzakas nzakas commented Sep 2, 2024

Prerequisites checklist

What is the purpose of this pull request?

Make ESLint an optional peer dependency.

What changes did you make? (Give an overview)

Added peerDependenciesMeta to package.json in order to set eslint as an optional peer dependency.

Practically speaking, the plugin doesn't require ESLint to be useful. We are using it in the Code Explorer without ESLint, where it's installation is causing npm errors because Code Explorer uses ESLint v8.x.

Related Issues

Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?

It seems like we shouldn't block installation of this package even if ESLint isn't installed or ESLint v8.x is installed, but let me know if anyone has a different opinion. From what I can tell, this change won't have any noticeable effect to most users of this plugin.

@eslint-github-bot eslint-github-bot bot added the bug Something isn't working label Sep 2, 2024
Copy link
Member

@amareshsm amareshsm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Marking ESLint as optional is a good idea. Looks good to me. LGTM

@fasttime
Copy link
Member

fasttime commented Sep 2, 2024

It seems like we shouldn't block installation of this package even if ESLint isn't installed or ESLint v8.x is installed, but let me know if anyone has a different opinion.

I think that to allow installing ESLint v8.x without the --force flag, the peerDependencies version for eslint should be changed to something like "^8.0.0 || ^9.6.0". Currently it's "^9.6.0".

"eslint": "^9.6.0",

Making the peer dependency optional will allow a package to install @eslint/json without eslint, but not with a version of eslint which is out of range.

For the same reason in eslint we have the jiti optional peer dependecy version set to "*" and not "^1.21.0", so consumers that use jiti for other purposes than to support eslint are free to install any version they want.

From what I can tell, this change won't have any noticeable effect to most users of this plugin.

Probably most users of this plugin will already have a new versioneslint declared in their devDependencies. So yes, there shouldn't be any noticeable effects. I'm fine with merging this as a fix: 👍

@nzakas
Copy link
Member Author

nzakas commented Sep 3, 2024

Making the peer dependency optional will allow a package to install @eslint/json without eslint, but not with a version of eslint which is out of range.

Hmm, not what we want. I wonder if it's best just remove the peer dependency altogether?

@fasttime
Copy link
Member

fasttime commented Sep 3, 2024

Hmm, not what we want. I wonder if it's best just remove the peer dependency altogether?

Makes sense I think, if it should be possible to install this package irrespective of eslint.

Copy link
Member

@amareshsm amareshsm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM 👍

Copy link
Member

@fasttime fasttime left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks!

@fasttime fasttime merged commit dd112e1 into main Sep 9, 2024
15 checks passed
@fasttime fasttime deleted the optional-eslint branch September 9, 2024 19:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
accepted bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants