tools: update ESLint to 5.0.0

[cjihrig]

This is still a work in progress. ESLint 5.x hasn't actually been released yet. This PR contains ESLint v5.0.0 v5.0.0-alpha.3v5.0.0-rc.0. The two commits also need to be rebased in the opposite order to avoid a broken commit from being in master.

Checklist

• make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
• tests and/or benchmarks are included
• commit message follows commit guidelines

[BridgeAR]

I would rather wait until this is not a pre release anymore. Especially since the fixes that this currently provides do not seem to be really important.

[cjihrig]

That's why it's listed as WIP

[BridgeAR]

But in that case this is going to be open for likely quite a while until it could land?

[cjihrig]

Possibly. But that's not a big deal.

[BridgeAR]

I disagree. I think it is bad to have a PR open that could just be opened when the PR could also land. Long standing open PRs are overhead for other collaborators as they will look into them from time to time. So -1 on that.

[addaleax]

That overhead is precisely why we have the “blocked” label. :)

If doing it this was is easier for somebody, that’s very much fine with me. Let’s not prescribe workflows when we don’t have to.

[Trott]

@cjihrig You may already be aware, but alpha 4 is out if you want to update. (Not sure if you want to track closely in this PR or if you'd rather only push to the branch when the ESLint update results in other code changes in our code base.)

[Trott]

ESLint 5.0.0 should be out in a few hours based on eslint/eslint#10458.

[cjihrig]

I updated this PR to 5.0.0-rc.0 the other night. I've also been following along with the ESLint release issues. My question is, where does it specify the version of the upcoming release? For example, will it be 5.0.0, 5.0.0-rc.1, or something completely different?

[Trott]

@cjihrig Oh, good point, it very well could be rc1. I was making assumptions...

[Trott]

@cjihrig I asked on the ESLint Gitter channel and @not-an-aardvark replied:

It will be 5.0.0, although the timing isn't entirely clear yet because we're still figuring out who is available to do the release. There's a possibility that it will instead happen tomorrow or sometime later this weekend.

[cjihrig]

Thanks, I'll be on the lookout for the release (not that we are in a huge rush for it).

@not-an-aardvark would it be possible for the ESLint team to start including the upcoming version in related GitHub issues? If there is a good reason not to, that's fine, but it would be helpful to not have to follow Gitter as well.

[not-an-aardvark]

I'd be open to adding more information there, That said, the decision about what type of release to create (minor vs patch, when we're not doing prereleases) is usually determined based on the commits that have landed since the previous release, so it might change shortly before a release happens if a semver-minor PR is merged. Is the confusion mainly about scheduling for prereleases/first stable releases?

[cjihrig]

Is the confusion mainly about scheduling for prereleases/first stable releases?

Yea, I think that's it. As an outsider that doesn't follow everything on the eslint repo, I don't have much insight into that. For example, it looks like v5 is going to have 5 alphas and 1 rc, while v4 had 3 alphas, 1 beta, and 1 rc. If those decisions are known ahead of time, it would be great to have in the issue tracker.

[not-an-aardvark]

Unfortunately the release schedule for major releases isn't decided very far in advance, and is largely based on external factors (e.g. how many bug reports we get). The decision that today's release would be stable was only made about 2 weeks ago. That said, for future releases I'll try to keep the issues more up to date with when the decisions are made.

[not-an-aardvark]

ESLint v5.0.0 has been released: https://eslint.org/blog/2018/06/eslint-v5.0.0-released

[cjihrig]

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/15572/

[Trott]

Rubber-stamp LGTM if CI is green

[cjihrig]

Looks like there is an issue with ARM infrastructure - https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-binary-arm/1986/.

[cjihrig]

New CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/15583/

The results look better. The FreeBSD flake didn't show up, and only one ARM machine had an infrastructure issue, which seems par for the course this weekend.