-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 22
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
Update: Mark no-assert-equal and no-assert-ok as deprecated #201
Conversation
@bmish Would you mind reviewing this? I added some logic around marking rules as deprecated (and replaced by others), curious if you think I could improve it. |
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ const assert = require("chai").assert, | |||
//------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | |||
|
|||
const MESSAGES = { | |||
deprecated: "**This rule has been deprecated.** Please see the project README for information about replacement rules.", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's follow the format of the other messages by starting this with an emoji: ❌
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ const assert = require("chai").assert, | |||
//------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | |||
|
|||
const MESSAGES = { | |||
deprecated: "**This rule has been deprecated.** Please see the project README for information about replacement rules.", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's add a link to the deprecated section of the README in the README
word.
I think we need to improve no-loose-assertions before it will be ready to replace the other two rules:
I can work on this fixing these issues in the coming weeks. We would then want to make CC: @raycohen about this move to consolidate on |
I had forgotten about marking I'll make a post in the 7.0.0 issue about how we want to handle this. |
I'm removing this from 7.0.0 and considering this on hold for now. We can't deprecate until I would love to get the "infrastructure" for deprecated rules in at some point, but that doesn't have to happen in 7.0.0 nor in this PR. |
Replaced by
no-loose-assertions
, which covers these rules but is also more flexible.