Issue #6303 - Introduce basic foundation for automation in adblockplusui

package.json

+{
+  "name": "adblockplusui",
+  "version": "0.0.0",

[Thomas Greiner, 2018/01/23 19:22:36]

Technically, we haven't decided on how we want to version UI releases so we may
want to wait for that until specifying a version number. In that regard, setting
"private: true" could be appropriate until we have a release process.

What do you think?

[a.giammarchi, 2018/01/24 10:52:37]

makes sense

+  "description": "AsBlock Plus UI",

[Thomas Greiner, 2018/01/23 19:22:35]

Typo: Replace "AsBlock Plus UI" with "Adblock Plus UI"

BTW we could use the text "Shared Adblock Plus UI code" which we use at
https://github.com/adblockplus/adblockplusui and
https://hg.adblockplus.org/adblockplusui/ if you want.

[a.giammarchi, 2018/01/24 10:52:37]

AsBlock ... gosh, 1 word, 2 errors ... coffee here I come again!

+  "scripts": {
+    "lint": "npm run lint:css && npm run lint:js",
+    "lint:css": "stylelint ./skin",

[Thomas Greiner, 2018/01/23 19:22:35]

Detail: You're specifying "*.js" for JavaScript linting so is there a reason why
you haven't appended "*.css" here?

[a.giammarchi, 2018/01/24 10:52:37]

skin has no subfolders while eslint was going through the whole project,
including node_modules folders. This is why ./*.js is mandatory for eslint, but
./lib and ./ext won't probably need the .js specificity.

Accordingly, either I use ./*.js only for the project root to avoid parsing sub
folders, and drop *.js for lib and ext, or I add *.css to stylelint command.

I don't have strong preferences here, let me know which one you prefer.

[Thomas Greiner, 2018/01/24 11:56:33]

The latter sounds most consistent in that case (i.e. adding "*.css" to the
stylelint command) due to the limitation with "./*.js".

+    "lint:js": "eslint ./*.js ./lib/*.js ./ext/*.js",
+    "prepare": "python2 ensure_dependencies.py",
+    "start": "http-server $1"
+  },
+  "devDependencies": {
+    "eslint": "^4.16.0",
+    "eslint-config-eyeo": "^2.0.0",
+    "eslint-config-medikoo-es5": "^1.4.7",
+    "eslint-config-standard": "^11.0.0-beta.0",
+    "eslint-plugin-import": "^2.8.0",
+    "eslint-plugin-node": "^5.2.1",
+    "eslint-plugin-promise": "^3.6.0",
+    "eslint-plugin-standard": "^3.0.1",

[Thomas Greiner, 2018/01/23 19:22:35]

I get that we need both "eslint" and "eslint-config-eyeo" but it'd be great if
you could elaborate on why you considered the other ones necessary.

While I assume that you got valid reasons for using each of them, I'd like to
make sure that we're not including dependencies which we don't actually need.

[a.giammarchi, 2018/01/24 10:52:36]

Good point.

I've tried `eslint` as command and it incrementally complained about other
modules. I start believing something went wrong with the node_folders, parsed as
well, probably containing other .eslinrc here and there.

I'll try to re-test all the things being sure I always use the ./*.js and
lib/ext folders only.

[Thomas Greiner, 2018/01/24 11:56:33]

Thanks, I appreciate that. In case the issue still persists, feel free to share
the warnings you get.

+    "http-server": "^0.11.1",

[Thomas Greiner, 2018/01/23 19:22:36]

Since we're no longer using test_server.py, we should remove that script from
the repository.

[a.giammarchi, 2018/01/24 10:52:37]

differently from git, when you commit the lovely mercurial doesn't automatically
flag deleted files amnd push them ... yes, I'll be happy to learn how to
explicitly drop files via hg.

[Thomas Greiner, 2018/01/24 11:56:33]

It's a bit more explicit in that regard, that's true. I think what you're
looking for is `hg remove` or `hg addremove`.

+    "stylelint": "^8.4.0",
+    "stylelint-config-eyeo": "*",
+    "stylelint-config-recommended": "^2.0.1"

[Thomas Greiner, 2018/01/24 15:40:35]

Since you were able to remove "eslint-config-standard" we can probably also
remove "stylelint-config-standard" now unless stylelint works differently in
that regard, for some reason.

+  }
+}