-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.6k
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
Create a Standard Readme linter #5
Comments
Hi @RichardLitt is there a linter already in progress? I started working on one that uses It's definitely a work in progress, and not 100% in line with the |
I've updated quality-docs to use remark's defaults and to accept a configuration file to override the default rules. The configuration file wouldn't have to be used in the case of standard-readme, but it made more sense to keep the defaults in remark rather than in quality-docs. |
@josiahsprague Nice! There is a linter in progress, but I haven't gotten very far at it. I don't have much bandwidth for making the linter right now (unfortunately). quality-docs looks good from a quick glance; I think that making it I'm a bit confused by your second post: is the default remark's defaults, or standard-readme's (based on the spec) defaults? |
The default I was referring to was remark's default. Seems reasonable to me to try to make remark-lint's defaults match the standard-readme spec. I'm assuming it's already pretty close, and I could open some PRs to update it where it's not. @wooorm what do you think? |
I think you’re talking about lint defaults, right? So whether to use In lieu of That being said, not sure if @RichardLitt envisions this project, and an accompanying linter more as style linter ( |
I was thinking more of an outline linter. I don't care about style - that's useful, for some things, but largely unimportant for the purposes of humanely digesting the information of the README. As long as it is Markdown format, I am happy. In some cases, like adding a |
Yup, I think so too! |
Ok, in that case I can add a set of rules to Any thoughts on renaming |
@josiahsprague That sounds good to me. If it works, renaming also makes sense! Let's rename when we have a working product; might also be smart to move the linter into this repo, like is done with feross/standard, so that we can actually download the linter with |
👍 It’s also possible to have both project alongside each other, right? In that case, |
I'll have to put this on the back burner for now, but now that I've gotten more familiar with the project, I'm thinking that
Where |
If someone wants to tackle this before I get back to it, feel free to open issues or PRs in |
Any updates on this? Love this project ❤️ Was just thinking about a similar project and was really happy to see that someone else is already working on this! 🎉 |
From my side, I'm working on a different team now, and don't have time to work on this. But feel free to fork what's there and continue working on it. I'm happy to answer questions. |
From mine, it isn't being prioritized at the moment, but should be in the next few months. |
What's current status of the linter? |
This was overly ambitious. I'm not currently working on it. I would be happy to advise on any PRs, though. |
It might be useful to link to https://github.com/RichardLitt/standard-readme-preset ? |
That would be a great idea. PRs accepted. |
There should be a linter, after the spec in the main readme is filled out. The linter will most likely use remark and remark-lint. This is the planning issue for the linter. Please subscribe here, and open new issues for tangential questions about Standard Readme.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: