- Issue created by @jonathan1055
- 🇬🇧United Kingdom jonathan1055
In run-local-checks.sh we have catered for this by adding
--ignore-pattern=vendor --ignore-pattern=node_modules
so could do the same in the gitlab job. But I think it may be tidier to use a.eslintignore
file, which can be active for both local and the pipeline job. - Merge request !376#3532272 eslint should ignore vendor and node_modules → (Merged) created by jonathan1055
-
fjgarlin →
committed 884df641 on main authored by
jonathan1055 →
Issue #3532272 by jonathan1055, fjgarlin: ESLint needs to ignore /vendor...
-
fjgarlin →
committed 884df641 on main authored by
jonathan1055 →
- 🇬🇧United Kingdom jonathan1055
The command line in
run-local-scripts.sh
now matches the command in our.gitlab-ci.yml
which is a "good thing"But I noticed that the 'check code' job is already green, so those prettier failures must have been fixed upstream or something.
https://git.drupalcode.org/project/gitlab_templates/-/merge_requests/377...
Still it is good that we have this .eslintignore file anyway. - Merge request !382#3532272 Add .eslintignore to run-local-checks.sh clean option → (Merged) created by jonathan1055
- 🇬🇧United Kingdom jonathan1055
I forgot to add the new
.eslintignore
file to the clean-up line when running the checks locally - new MR382 -
fjgarlin →
committed 3db12a6e on main authored by
jonathan1055 →
Issue #3532272 by jonathan1055, fjgarlin: ESLint needs to ignore /vendor...
-
fjgarlin →
committed 3db12a6e on main authored by
jonathan1055 →
- 🇬🇧United Kingdom jonathan1055
Ah! the file also needs to be in the
.gitignore
just like the other copied internal assets file. Shall I just add that into the MR on 📌 Exclude node_modules folder from artifacts Active to save making yet another new one here? - 🇪🇸Spain fjgarlin
Thanks for noticing! Happy either way. It can go with the other one given that it's the most active issue at the moment.
- 🇬🇧United Kingdom jonathan1055
I didn't get that line into the MR on 📌 Exclude node_modules folder from artifacts Active but will add it into 📌 Is CORE_SECURITY_PREVIOUS_MINOR the right version for "previous minor" Active