build: add eslint-plugin-node rulesets to yarn lint

[hailiu2586]

added eslint-plugin-node ruleset to yarn lint

1. This allows yarn lint to scan for missing entry in package.json from use of 'import ...' in the source code (rule 'node/no-extraneous-import')

2. fixed the reported rule violations in tools and extensions by looking up the missing entry from yarn.lock and add those the corresponding package.json

3. added inline suppression of no-extraneous-require for absh specific command

The net result is that 'npm install --production' will work against packages/server/package.json, (after transform '@bfc/...: *' to '@bfc/..: {path to local .tgz}'

refs #1778

Type of change

Please delete options that are not relevant.

• [x ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)

Checklist

• [x ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
• [x ] I have functionally tested my change

Screenshots

Please include screenshots or gifs if your PR include UX changes.

[a-b-r-o-w-n]

@hailiu2586 I recently removed the need for prepare-prod.js and instead stopped fighting against yarn workspaces. Checkout the updated Dockerfile if you are interested. That being said, since we want to support the ABS-H deploy, we will be happy to accept some platform changes. I'll need to consider the botbuilder-expression change from a semver to a uri resolution. As for what to do with prepare-prod.js, is it possible for this not to be included in the Composer repo?

EDIT:
I forgot to mention that the botbuilder-expression package should be published to npm as part of the R7 release, so maybe we can hold on that change until that occurs and the problem is solved?

[boydc2014]

@hailiu2586 I recently removed the need for prepare-prod.js and instead stopped fighting against yarn workspaces. Checkout the updated Dockerfile if you are interested. That being said, since we want to support the ABS-H deploy, we will be happy to accept some platform changes. I'll need to consider the botbuilder-expression change from a semver to a uri resolution. As for what to do with prepare-prod.js, is it possible for this not to be included in the Composer repo?

EDIT:
I forgot to mention that the botbuilder-expression package should be published to npm as part of the R7 release, so maybe we can hold on that change until that occurs and the problem is solved?

Yes, expression-library will goes into npm in 1 day or 2. Npm will be used as release version, but i'm expecting composer will somehow still need daily package from myget, and the correct package name for that is "botframework-expression" (so the dependency in indexers needs to be corrected) and the suggested way to refer a daily package, is through yarn.lock, as we did previously, and as Andy copied into docker.

[zhixzhan]

@hailiu2586 I recently removed the need for prepare-prod.js and instead stopped fighting against yarn workspaces. Checkout the updated Dockerfile if you are interested. That being said, since we want to support the ABS-H deploy, we will be happy to accept some platform changes. I'll need to consider the botbuilder-expression change from a semver to a uri resolution. As for what to do with prepare-prod.js, is it possible for this not to be included in the Composer repo?
EDIT:
I forgot to mention that the botbuilder-expression package should be published to npm as part of the R7 release, so maybe we can hold on that change until that occurs and the problem is solved?

Yes, expression-library will goes into npm in 1 day or 2. Npm will be used as release version, but i'm expecting composer will somehow still need daily package from myget, and the correct package name for that is "botframework-expression" (so the dependency in indexers needs to be corrected) and the suggested way to refer a daily package, is through yarn.lock, as we did previously, and as Andy copied into docker.

fixed in #1737

[github-actions]

Coverage decreased (-0.04%) to 40.278% when pulling 30a4984 on hailiu/server-build into 99e87dc on master.

[a-b-r-o-w-n]

Got a couple of minor changes. Can we remove the app insights code from this PR and review that separately?

[hailiu2586]

@a-b-r-o-w-n does this refactor meet your requirement on how app insights get configured?

[a-b-r-o-w-n]

I was thinking we could add that in a separate pull request.

[a-b-r-o-w-n]

ping @hailiu2586