Skip to content
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

Main #40

Open
wants to merge 11 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Main #40

wants to merge 11 commits into from

Conversation

Gijsdeman
Copy link
Contributor

@Gijsdeman Gijsdeman commented Feb 24, 2025

Description

PR mainly consists of platform updates that should enhance the work and release flow. Rather then merging to master; should become the new main branch.

I wanted to update move eslint to use the @gewis/eslint-config-typescript. However, this config uses type information and causes a lot of errors on the repository. I will address this in a separate PR.

Most file changes stem from prettier. This is added since ts-eslint no longer supports stylistic rules. Everything but the last commit can be checked without having to scroll through all the files.

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • CI/CD (Changes to the CI/CD configuration)

`corepack enable` required to ensure you are on the right yarn version.
Skipping:
- tsoa: knowing this has breaking changes, will be for later
- eslint: knowing we will switch later to the centralized eslint configs
- typescript: switching to newer version later; as it also requires
  upgrading express types
@Gijsdeman Gijsdeman force-pushed the main branch 3 times, most recently from bcb9c8d to 5532ed1 Compare February 25, 2025 12:06
@Gijsdeman Gijsdeman force-pushed the main branch 2 times, most recently from e960471 to b1dedd3 Compare February 25, 2025 13:10
@Gijsdeman Gijsdeman marked this pull request as ready for review February 25, 2025 13:24
@Yoronex
Copy link
Member

Yoronex commented Feb 25, 2025

Can't we just rename the master branch to main?

@Gijsdeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

Since the workflows had to be rewritten either way, just naming this branch main seemed a reasonable choice.

Since the branch exists with the latest changes on it, it will likely be easiest to simply mark this as the new main branch after approved rather than merging it into master and then renaming it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants