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

feat: additional rule metadata for deprecations #124

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Nov 12, 2024
281 changes: 281 additions & 0 deletions designs/2024-deprecated-rule-metadata/README.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,281 @@
- Repo: eslint/eslint
- Start Date: 2024-02-20
- RFC PR: <https://github.com/eslint/rfcs/pull/124>
- Authors: [bmish](https://github.com/bmish), [DMartens](https://github.com/DMartens)

# Support additional metadata for rule deprecations

## Summary

<!-- One-paragraph explanation of the feature. -->

This RFC suggests a format for storing additional information in rule metadata about rule deprecations and replacement rules, allowing tooling (e.g. documentation generators) to generate more informative deprecation notices.

## Motivation

<!-- Why are we doing this? What use cases does it support? What is the expected
outcome? -->

There are long-time [rule meta properties](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/extend/custom-rules#rule-structure) `meta.deprecated` and `meta.replacedBy` that have been intended to document when rules are deprecated and what their replacement rule(s) are. For the most part, usage would look something like this:

```js
module.exports = { meta: { deprecated: true, replacedBy: ['replacement-rule-name'] } };
```

These properties are often used for generating plugin/rule documentation websites and in documentation tooling like [eslint-doc-generator](https://github.com/bmish/eslint-doc-generator).

But there are some limitations to this current format:

- Simply providing the replacement rule name as a string doesn't yield much context/explanation of the replacement/deprecation. That means documentation tooling / websites and code editors can only generate limited information to present about the situation.
- Some rules provide the replacement rule name with the plugin prefix as in `prefix/rule-name` while others just provide it as `rule-name`, which can result in ambiguity about whether the replacement rule is in the same plugin, a different third-party plugin, or ESLint core. And for third-party plugins, there's no easy way to automatically determine where their documentation is located or how to link to them.

## Detailed Design

<!--
This is the bulk of the RFC.

Explain the design with enough detail that someone familiar with ESLint
can implement it by reading this document. Please get into specifics
of your approach, corner cases, and examples of how the change will be
used. Be sure to define any new terms in this section.
-->

We propose to extend `meta.deprecated` rule property schemas to reduce ambiguity and allow additional key details to be represented, described below using TypeScript types for clarity:

```ts
type RuleMeta = {
deprecated?:
| boolean // Existing boolean option, backwards compatible.
| string // Shorthand property for general deprecation message, such as why the deprecation occurred. Empty strings are forbidden as they are falsy.
| DeprecatedInfo // Proposed extension

/** @deprecated */
replacedBy?: string[] // Deprecate the top-level property and "move" into the "deprecated" object
};

/* At least one property is required */
type DeprecateInfo = {
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
info?: Message
replacedBy?: (string|ReplacedByInfo)[] // An empty array explicitly states that there is no replacement
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
}

/* At least one property is required */
type ReplacedByInfo = {
plugin?: string | Specifier // name should be "eslint" if the replacemenet is an ESLint core rule. Omit the property if the replacement is in the same plugin
rule?: string | Specifier
info?: string | Message
kind?: ReplacementKind // Defaults to "moved" if missing
deprecatedSince?: Version // Helps users gauge when to migrate and useful for documentation
availableUntil?: Version | null // The estimated version when the rule is removed (probably the next major version). null means the rule is "frozen" (will be available but will not be changed)
mdjermanovic marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
}

type Message = {
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
message: string // General message presented to the user. Content depends on the property (e.g. for the key rule why the rule is deprecated or for info how to replace the rule)
url: // URL to more information about this deprecation in general.
}

type Specifier = {
name: string // Name of the rule / configuration / ...
url: string // URL to more information about this deprecation in general.
}

type ReplacementKind =
'moved' | // The rule has moved to another plugin if plugin is set, otherwise the rule is renamed in the same plugin
'merged' | // The rule merged with another rule
'option' // The current rule behavior is available as an option in the replacement rule
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

/* Version string of the package containing the rule */
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
type Version = string
```

The `meta.replacedBy` property is moved into the `meta.deprecated` property as `meta.replacedBy` requires `meta.deprecated` to be set.
The reason for this is that a rule logically must be marked as deprecated to be replaced by another rule which it currently can be.

### Example
Real-world example of how this could be used based on the situation in <https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/18053>:

```js
// lib/rules/semi.js
module.exports = {
meta: {
deprecated: {
message: 'Stylistic rules are being moved out of ESLint core.',
url: 'https://eslint.org/blog/2023/10/deprecating-formatting-rules/',
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
replacedBy: [
{
plugin: {
name: '@stylistic/js',
url: 'https://eslint.style/',
},
rule: 'https://eslint.style/rules/js/semi',
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
},
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
],
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
},
},
};
```


This data could be used by documentation websites and tooling like [eslint-doc-generator](https://github.com/bmish/eslint-doc-generator) to generate notices and links like:

> semi (deprecated) \
> Replaced by [semi](https://eslint.style/rules/js/semi) from [@stylistic/js](https://eslint.style/). \
> Use the `foo` option on the new rule to achieve the same behavior as before. [Read more](https://example.com/how-to-migrate-to-the-new-semi-rule). \
> Stylistic rules are being moved out of ESLint core. [Read more](https://eslint.org/blog/2023/10/deprecating-formatting-rules/).

We can also support the same `meta.deprecated` and `meta.replacedBy` properties on configurations and processors (the other kinds of objects exported by ESLint plugins), replacing `rule` with `config` or `processor` as needed. This would be part of the effort to standardize documentation properties in <https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/17842>.

### Shorthand
The shorthand for the properties `plugin`, `rule` and `info` is just a string representing either the `name`/`message` or the `url` based on its content.
If it starts with a protocol (e.g. `https://`) the property should be interpreted as if only the `url` property is set, otherwise it should be interpreted as `name`/`message` property.
This shorthand also applies for the existing `meta.deprecated` which then applies for the `meta.deprecated.info` properties.
Some examples:
```js
{ meta: { deprecated: { plugin: 'https://eslint.style' } } } // <=> { meta: { deprecated: { plugin: { url: 'https://eslint.style' } } } }
{ meta: { deprecated: { plugin: '@eslint-stylistic/js' } } } // <=> { meta: { deprecated: { plugin: { name: '@eslint-stylistic/js' } } } }
{ meta: { deprecated: 'https://eslint.style/guide/migration' } // <=> { meta: { deprecated: { info: { url: 'https://eslint.style/guide/migration' } } } }
```
mdjermanovic marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

### Changes
In terms of actual changes inside ESLint needed for this:

- Mention the new schema in the [custom rule documentation](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/extend/custom-rules#rule-structure)
- Ensure these properties are allowed on configurations, parsers and processors
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
- Add any additional information to these properties in core rules as desired (such as in <https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/18053>)
- Update ESLint's website generator to take into account the additional information for rule doc deprecation notices
- Update [LintResult.usedDeprecatedRules](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/blob/0f5df509a4bc00cff2c62b90fab184bdf0231322/lib/eslint/eslint.js#L197-L211)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you add more details about this change? Shall we keep the existing replacedBy: string[] property and/or add a new one with the DeprecatedInfo object?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think that removing or changing the format of DeprecatedRuleInfo.replacedBy could break existing tools like custom formatters. Maybe it would be better to expose the RuleMeta.deprecated object as a new property of DeprecatedRuleInfo?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should normalize the old and new format for replacedBy and provide the new data if available under a new property named info as this backwards-compatible.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should normalize the old and new format for replacedBy and provide the new data if available under a new property named info as this backwards-compatible.

Sounds good to me.


External changes:

- Update the [types](https://github.com/DefinitelyTyped/DefinitelyTyped/blob/b77d83e019025017b06953907cb77f35e4231714/types/eslint/index.d.ts#L734) in @types/eslint
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
- Update the [types](https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint/blob/82cb9dd580f62644ed988fd2bf27f519177a60bd/packages/utils/src/ts-eslint/Rule.ts#L70) in @typescript-eslint/eslint
- Update eslint-doc-generator to handle the new information: <https://github.com/bmish/eslint-doc-generator/issues/512>
- Update the metadata for the most common plugins
- Consider implementing an [eslint-plugin-eslint-plugin](https://github.com/eslint-community/eslint-plugin-eslint-plugin) rule to encourage more complete deprecation information to be stored in these properties

## Documentation

<!--
How will this RFC be documented? Does it need a formal announcement
on the ESLint blog to explain the motivation?
-->

We don't necessarily need a formal announcement for this. The aforementioned changes to the rule documentation page and types should be sufficient.

However, this update could be covered in a blog post about general rule documentation best practices, if anyone ever has an interest in writing something like that.

## Drawbacks

<!--
Why should we *not* do this? Consider why adding this into ESLint
might not benefit the project or the community. Attempt to think
about any opposing viewpoints that reviewers might bring up.

Any change has potential downsides, including increased maintenance
burden, incompatibility with other tools, breaking existing user
experience, etc. Try to identify as many potential problems with
implementing this RFC as possible.
-->

There are some limited [backwards compatibility](#backwards-compatibility-analysis) concerns for third-party tooling.

## Backwards Compatibility Analysis

<!--
How does this change affect existing ESLint users? Will any behavior
change for them? If so, how are you going to minimize the disruption
to existing users?
-->

Existing rules will continue to be backwards-compatible with the new format.

Changing the format of these properties mainly affects third-party documentation tooling and websites that use this information, and not ESLint users nor ESLint plugins directly.

For the most part, the new `meta.deprecated` format should be backwards-compatible, as code is often written to check simply for a truthy value inside of `meta.deprecated`, e.g. `if (rule.meta.deprecated) { /* ... */ }`, which will continue to work as expected. The code needs to be updated if:
- it checks specifically for the boolean `true` value in `meta.deprecated`
- it checks for whether the rule is deprecated by checking for a non-empty `meta.replacedBy`
- retrieves rule names from `meta.replacedBy`

Overall, a limited number of third-party tools that might be affected, and these should be trivial to fix when impacts are discovered.

We do not need to consider this to be a breaking change in terms of [ESLint's semantic versioning policy](https://github.com/eslint/eslint#semantic-versioning-policy).

## Alternatives

<!--
What other designs did you consider? Why did you decide against those?

This section should also include prior art, such as whether similar
projects have already implemented a similar feature.
-->

### Do nothing

This would leave the current `meta.deprecated` and `meta.replacedBy` properties as they are, which would continue to be ambiguous and limited in the information they can provide.

### Create a new property

Create a new property, e.g. `meta.deprecation`,

## Open Questions

<!--
This section is optional, but is suggested for a first draft.

What parts of this proposal are you unclear about? What do you
need to know before you can finalize this RFC?

List the questions that you'd like reviewers to focus on. When
you've received the answers and updated the design to reflect them,
you can remove this section.
-->

1. Is there additional deprecation information we'd like to represent? Note that additional information can always be added later, but it's good to consider any possible needs now.
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
2. Should `meta.deprecated.plugin.id` accommodate different package registries (e.g. [jsr](https://jsr.io/) with `jsr:eslint-plugin-example`)
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
3. Should the exact regular expression for the shorthand which decides whether it is a description or URL be specified?
4. Should the shorthand also be applied for the string form of the `meta.deprecated` property?
mdjermanovic marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
5. Which "extension points" (rules, processors, configurations, parsers, formatters) shold be supported?
6. Should the `rule` key be dependent on the "extension point" (e.g. `processor` for processors) or renamed (e.g. ``) so that it is the same property name for all?
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the scope of this RFC is just rules deprecations. But if we are already anticipating that other extension points (processors, configurations, parsers, formatters) will have deprecation info, with the same shape, then a more generic name like replacement might have sense, so that it's the same property name for all.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I do not know of examples for other extension points being deprecated but especially with the introduction of language plugins, I can see some processors being deprecated (e.g. eslint-plugin-markdown).


## Help Needed

<!--
This section is optional.

Are you able to implement this RFC on your own? If not, what kind
of help would you need from the team?
-->

I should be able to handle the minimal changes needed in ESLint core, and can kick off some of the changes needed in community projects.

## Frequently Asked Questions

- Why not provide a property to describe how to migrate to the replacement rule which requires an option to be set?
- The options of the replacement rule could change and it is unlikely that a deprecated rules gets updated to accommodate the change

<!--
This section is optional but suggested.

Try to anticipate points of clarification that might be needed by
the people reviewing this RFC. Include those questions and answers
in this section.
-->

## Related Discussions

<!--
This section is optional but suggested.

If there is an issue, pull request, or other URL that provides useful
context for this proposal, please include those links here.
-->

- [The original RFC](https://github.com/eslint/rfcs/pull/116)
- [The issue triggering this RFC](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/18061)
- Inspirations
- <https://github.com/jsx-eslint/eslint-plugin-react/pull/3469#discussion_r1002316631>
- <https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/5774#issuecomment-220640368>
- Related
- <https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/17842>
- <https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/18694>
DMartens marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
- <https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/18053>
Loading