OpenStack starts to support ES6, so the config has been updated with instructions how to enable ES6 support. "ecmaFeatures" were moved under "parserOptions" as it's required by ESLint 2.x, all ES6-related flags were removed as they're enabled using env.es6. Change-Id: I5531534e2ab12ece0859816679aa19deb974957e
|7 years ago|
|spec||7 years ago|
|.editorconfig||8 years ago|
|.eslintrc||7 years ago|
|.gitignore||8 years ago|
|.gitreview||8 years ago|
|.npmrc||8 years ago|
|LICENSE||8 years ago|
|README.md||7 years ago|
|index.js||8 years ago|
|package.json||7 years ago|
OpenStack has a set of style guidelines for clarity. OpenStack is a very large code base, spanning dozens of git trees, with over a thousand developers contributing every 6 months. As such, common style helps developers understand code in reviews, move between projects smoothly, and overall make the code more maintainable.
Even though eslint permits overriding rules on a per-project basis, it should be the goal of every project to stay as close to the common guidelines as possible.
To add these rules to your project, follow these steps.
npm install --save-dev eslint eslint-config-openstack
extends: "openstack"to your
If you would like to contribute, please follow OpenStack's contribution guidelines.
Rules only land with consensus
Patches that activate, deactivate, or modify rules, should only be merged if a consensus of reviewers is reached. In this case, consensus means at least five positive votes (+1 or +2), with no -1 votes. Cores may not override and/or ignore -1 votes.
Library upgrades require two cores
Patches that upgrade eslint only require two core approvers to land. These patches must add new upstream rules in a deactivated state, and delete any deprecated rules.
Policy upgrades require all cores
Updates to policies and governance on this project require +2 votes from all direct cores on the project. Core votes from the parent OpenStack QA project are optional.
Patches should be abandoned after a month of inactivity
Cores should attempt to keep the list of extant patches small and managable. As such, they should talk to any author whose patch has failed to garner the necessary support, and has experienced one month of inactivity. Reasonable notice should be given to the author before a patch is abandoned.