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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

chore: import eslint rules from eslint-config-loopback #3043

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 4, 2019

Conversation

bajtos
Copy link
Member

@bajtos bajtos commented Jun 4, 2019

This pull request adds rules from eslint-config-loopback (see https://github.com/strongloop/eslint-config-loopback/blob/master/eslint.json) and fixes violations of these new rules (mostly mocha/no-identical-title).

This is a follow-up for #2492 which switched loopback-next from tslint to eslint.

Checklist

馃憠 Read and sign the CLA (Contributor License Agreement) 馃憟

  • npm test passes on your machine
  • New tests added or existing tests modified to cover all changes
  • Code conforms with the style guide
  • API Documentation in code was updated
  • Documentation in /docs/site was updated
  • Affected artifact templates in packages/cli were updated
  • Affected example projects in examples/* were updated

馃憠 Check out how to submit a PR 馃憟

Also fix violations of these new rules (mostly mocha/no-identical-title)

Signed-off-by: Miroslav Bajto拧 <mbajtoss@gmail.com>
@bajtos bajtos added the Internal Tooling Issues related to our tooling and monorepo infrastructore label Jun 4, 2019
@bajtos bajtos requested a review from raymondfeng June 4, 2019 10:40
@bajtos bajtos self-assigned this Jun 4, 2019
@raymondfeng raymondfeng merged commit 2ff2463 into master Jun 4, 2019
@delete-merged-branch delete-merged-branch bot deleted the chore/lb3-eslint-rules branch June 4, 2019 14:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Internal Tooling Issues related to our tooling and monorepo infrastructore
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants