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: Introduce ecosystem tests for popular plugins #127

Open
wants to merge 26 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
26 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
d55fe1a
feat: Introduce ecosystem tests for popular third-party plugins
JoshuaKGoldberg Nov 26, 2024
9baeb50
Update designs/2024-repo-ecosystem-plugin-tests/README.md
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 3, 2024
a52ca5e
on all PRs
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 3, 2024
1329c1a
Split issue/PR steps for main vs. PR
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 3, 2024
cdb2677
Out of Scope: automation
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 3, 2024
071532d
Added eslint-plugin-eslint-comments
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 3, 2024
7d61947
if (they) meet - typo
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 3, 2024
d1ab08b
Mention examples of fixed breakages within a week
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 3, 2024
994a1a8
Note 1-week fix examples and add to selection criteria
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 3, 2024
2dcf2be
Small fixes: clarification, typo
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 3, 2024
5a79c72
Clarification: 'those' steps
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 3, 2024
e663bf3
Added: dogfooding not being enough; 'all' enablements
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 6, 2024
91aa502
Apply suggestions from code review
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 10, 2024
4612800
Expand to first-(second-?)party plugins
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 10, 2024
8fd5da4
Automate updates
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 10, 2024
0f518bf
Explain the off-main branch
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 13, 2024
c176a7e
Switch cron job to be actually just a cron job
JoshuaKGoldberg Dec 18, 2024
7fef2ef
Apply suggestions from code review
JoshuaKGoldberg Jan 20, 2025
c767f0f
Clarifications: rollout and some small points
JoshuaKGoldberg Jan 20, 2025
8ddf9ea
Noted internal/private API usage as out of scope
JoshuaKGoldberg Jan 20, 2025
480a8bb
Increase scope: test:eslint-compat
JoshuaKGoldberg Feb 6, 2025
a26b9ee
typo: Plugin Selection
JoshuaKGoldberg Feb 6, 2025
fb5f7bd
Note on build script name
JoshuaKGoldberg Feb 6, 2025
3df1980
Update designs/2024-repo-ecosystem-plugin-tests/README.md
JoshuaKGoldberg Feb 17, 2025
1a3bf12
Remove no-longer-relevant FAQ
JoshuaKGoldberg Feb 17, 2025
e16a614
Mention linking
JoshuaKGoldberg Feb 17, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
177 changes: 177 additions & 0 deletions designs/2024-repo-ecosystem-plugin-tests/README.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,177 @@
- Repo: eslint/eslint
- Start Date: 2024-11-25
- RFC PR: <https://github.com/eslint/rfcs/pull/127>
- Authors: [Josh Goldberg](https://github.com/JoshuaKGoldberg)

# Introduce ecosystem tests for popular plugins

## Summary

Adding an CI job to the `eslint/eslint` repository that checks changes against `@eslint/*` plugins as well as a small selection of third-party plugins.

## Motivation

Changes in ESLint occasionally break downstream plugins in unexpected ways.
Those changes might be unintentional breaking changes, or even non-breaking changes that happen to touch edge case behaviors relied on by plugins.

[Bug: Error while loading rule '@typescript-eslint/no-unused-expressions'](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/19134) reports an example change in ESLint that caused downstream breakages in third-party plugins.
At least two popular plugins -[`eslint-plugin-unicorn`](https://github.com/sindresorhus/eslint-plugin-unicorn/issues/2496) and [`typescript-eslint`](https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint/issues/10338)- were broken by that change.

The plugins broke because they were relying on non-public implementation details of ESLint rules per [Docs: Formalize recommendation against plugins calling to rules via use-at-your-own-risk](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/19169).
ESLint core's [`eslint-config-eslint`](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/tree/main/packages/eslint-config-eslint) does not use all rules of downstream plugins and is not always up-to-date with their latest versions, so its internal usage of plugins is not sufficient to flag all high visibility compatibility issues.
When the root cause is a bug in the downstream plugins, an "early warning" system would help them fix their issues before the incompatible changes to ESLint are published.

## Detailed Design

This RFC proposes creating a small list of popular third-party plugins that will be tested as part of ESLint's CI.
Each plugin will have a `test:eslint-compat` script in their `package.json` that runs lint rule tests.

See [Plugin Selection](#plugin-selection) below for specifics on which plugins will be included.

> ⚠️ Plugins are currently being asked for feedback on the `test:eslint-compat` script.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That's good. If there are any questions I think we can also discuss them in this RFC.


### CI Job
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we utilize eslint-remote-tester for testing against other repositories? If not, can we mention it under "alternatives considered" or at least mention it as prior art?

I know a number of popular plugins use it like:

@AriPerkkio

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for ping @bmish. Here's a quick summary of what eslint-remote-tester does:

  • In eslint-remote-tester.config.js/ts you'll configure ESLint config (identical to ESLint's overrideConfig) and repositories that should be cloned on the file system.
  • When run, it spins up x-amount of node:worker_threads that each handle a single repository parallel.
  • A single thread clones the assigned repository and run ESLint using Node API against it. Results are reported back to main thread.
  • Main thread constructs markdown or plain-text files and writes them to file system or outputs to CLI

There are some examples of bugs it can find automatically listed here: AriPerkkio/eslint-remote-tester#3. I used to run it against most popular community plugins for a while couple of years ago.

I know a number of popular plugins use it like:

Also worth to mention: eslint-plugin-unicorn, eslint-plugin-jest, eslint-plugin-testing-library and eslint-plugin-vitest.

For the other ecosystem CI setups I would recommend to check how Vite and Vitest does this. There has also been some thoughts about making a generic ecosystem-ci that all Javascript ecosystem packages could utilize. It would not be strictly tied to Vite-ecosystem like the current ones are.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

TIL, thanks for the reference! I think it would actually make a lot of sense to use eslint-remote-tester. It does roughly what we're suggesting, but with much better parallelization and reporting. Nice! 🔥

I put up a PoC branch here: https://github.com/JoshuaKGoldberg/eslint/tree/eslint-remote-tester-poc/tests/remote.

I'm in favor, but am hesitant to change the RFC until the TSC weighs in.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is an interesting idea, but I think we should first decide if we want to run plugin tests instead (#127 (comment)).


The new CI job will, for each plugin:

1. Clone the plugin into a directory named `test/ecosystem/${plugin}`
2. Run the plugin's package installation and build commands with [ni](https://github.com/antfu-collective/ni)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

How will ni be installed? And will ni automatically install npm (or another package manager) if it's not found locally, and does this also work in a CI environment?

3. Link the plugin to the current eslint installation
- This will have to be done manually, as ni does not support linking ([ni#85](https://github.com/antfu-collective/ni/issues/85 "ni issue 85: Maybe xxx link can join ni project"))
4. Run the plugin's `test:eslint-compat` script with [ni](https://github.com/antfu-collective/ni)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does ni also install Node.js in the correct version for the package?


This will all be runnable locally with a `package.json` script like `npm run test:ecosystem --plugin eslint-plugin-unicorn`.

An addition to `.github/workflows/ci.yml` under `jobs` would approximately look like:

```yml
test_ecosystem:
name: Test Ecosystem Plugins
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
strategy:
matrix:
plugin:
- eslint-plugin-unicorn
- eslint-plugin-vue
- typescript-eslint
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: actions/setup-node@v4
with:
node-version: "lts/*"
- name: Install Packages
run: npm install
- name: Test ${{ matrix.plugin }}
run: npm run test:ecosystem --plugin ${{ matrix.plugin }}
```

For now, it is assumed each plugin that needs to be built before testing does so with a script named `build`.
The CI job could be given overrides in the `matrix.plugin` to override the name of the builder script(s) as needed.

### Failure Handling

It is theoretically possible that the ecosystem CI job will occasionally be broken by updates to plugins.
However, this RFC believes that case will be exceedingly rare and short-lived:

- Per [Plugin Selection](#plugin-selection), only very stable plugins that test on multiple ESLint versions including the latest will be selected
- Today, plugin breakages are typically resolved within a week - even without this RFC's proposed "early warning" detection
- Example: [typescript-eslint#10191](https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint/issues/10191) was reported on October 21st, 2024 and a fix published on October 28th, 2024
- Example: [typescript-eslint#10338](https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint/issues/10338) was reported on November 15th, 2024 and a fix published on November 18th, 2024
- Example: [eslint-plugin-unicorn#2496](https://github.com/sindresorhus/eslint-plugin-unicorn/issues/2496) was reported on November 15th, 2024 and a fix published on November 19th, 2024

If a breakage occurs on the `main` branch of ESLint, it will be assumed a plugin has introduced a compatibility bug and should be fixed.
This RFC proposes the following process:

1. An ESLint team member should file issues tracking fixing the breakage:
- A bug report on the plugin's repository if it doesn't yet exist
- An issue on `eslint/eslint` linking to that bug report
2. If the issue isn't resolved by the next day, an ESLint team member should:
1. Send a PR to the ESLint repository to remove the plugin from ESLint's ecosystem CI job
2. File a followup issue to re-add it once the breakage is fixed

In the case of a breakage being discovered on a PR branch, this RFC proposes the following process:

1. If the failure is an indication of an issue in the PR, the PR should be updated as usual
2. Otherwise, if the failure is an indication the plugin needs to be updated, the PR's author should drive filing issues to update the plugin:
1. The PR author should file a bug report on the plugin's repository - if it doesn't yet exist
2. If the issue isn't resolved within two weeks:
1. The PR's author should remove the plugin from ESLint's ecosystem CI job in the PR
2. The PR's author should file a followup issue on ESLint, initially labeled as `blocked`, to re-add it once the breakage is fixed
3. Once the breakage is fixed, a team member should replace the issue's `blocked` label with `accepted`

### Major Releases

Upcoming new major versions of ESLint are an expected failure case for ecosystem plugins.
The ecosystem CI job will skip running any plugin that doesn't explicitly support the version of ESLint being tested.

Plugin version support will be determined by the maximum `eslint` peer dependency range in the plugin's published `package.json`, if it exists.
Otherwise the ESLint repository will assume only supporting up to the currently stable version of ESLint.

### Plugin Selection

The plugins that will be included to start will be:

- All `@eslint/*` plugins, including [`@eslint/css`](https://www.npmjs.com/package/@eslint/css), [`@eslint/json`](https://www.npmjs.com/package/@eslint/json), and [`@eslint/markdown`](https://www.npmjs.com/package/@eslint/markdown)
- [`eslint-plugin-eslint-comments`](https://github.com/eslint-community/eslint-plugin-eslint-comments): to capture an `eslint-community` project and AST edge cases around comments
- [`eslint-plugin-unicorn`](https://github.com/sindresorhus/eslint-plugin-unicorn): to capture a large selection of miscellaneous rules
- [`eslint-plugin-vue`](https://github.com/vuejs/eslint-plugin-vue): to capture support for a framework with nested parsing of a non-JavaScript/TypeScript-standard syntax
- [`typescript-eslint`](https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint): to capture testing TypeScript APIs and intricate uses of parsing in general

Third-party plugins will be selectively added if they meet all of the following criteria:

- &gt;1 million npm downloads a week: arbitrary large size threshold to avoid small packages
- Adding a notable new API usage not yet covered: to avoid duplicate equivalent plugins
- Has had a breakage reported on ESLint: to be cautious in adding to the list
- Is under active maintenance and has taken a week or less to fix any ESLint breakages within the last year: to avoid packages that won't be updated quickly on failures
- Add a `test:eslint-compat` script that exclusively runs lint rule tests

The number of third-party plugins should remain small.
Each added plugin adds a risk of breakage, so plugins will only be added after filing a new issue and gaining team consensus.

### Rollout

This RFC expects the added ecosystem CI job to _likely_ consistently pass.
A CI job will be added to the `eslint/eslint` repository, but will not immediately be a part of `main` branch or PR branch builds.
To be safe, this RFC proposes rolling out CI job in three steps:

1. On a CI cron job once a day, targeting the `main` branch but not blocking its builds
2. On the `main` branch only, with failures showing as failures in its builds
3. On all PRs targeting the `main` branch, alongside existing CI jobs

Each step will replace the previous step.
Once all three are done, running ecosystem tests will be a standard part of `main` branch and pull request CI along with existing tasks like linting and testing.

Starting with a job separately from `main` ensures that unexpectedly high frequencies of breakages are caught early, without blocking `main` branch builds.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm a bit confused by this process. Is the intent that we end up with all three at the end? Or just number 3?

And I'm unclear on the value of number 2. Presumably, this is meant to run only after a PR is merged, but how will we be notified if the job fails?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

intent

My intent was that each step would replace the previous. As in, at the end, we end up with just 3, which is a superset of 2.

how will be notified

I was thinking the ❌ failing commit on the main branch.

I clarified the intent in c767f0f. Does that make sense?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was thinking the ❌ failing commit on the main branch.

The problem with this is that it's passive -- it requires someone looking at the GitHub repo Code tab. (And then it requires that someone care enough to click on it to see what's going on.) I feel like this will be easy to miss. Is there some way to have a notification of some sort?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

GitHub user that merged the PR gets a notification if CI checks failed on the main branch, so perhaps that user could take further steps and/or notify the rest of the team in the team channel.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't get GitHub emails so I'd never know. 😄 I think we need an automated solution.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

How about sending a Discord message to the #contributors channel? Something like https://github.com/Ilshidur/action-discord could automate it.

My only concern there would be spamming the channel if multiple successive builds fail. Folks might be merging PRs without keeping them up-to-date with main. We can always add logic to only run the message if the current commit build failed and the previous commit build succeeded.

At least one month should be held between those steps to make sure the job is consistently passing.

## Out of Scope

Automation could be added for at least the filing of issues on plugin failures.
That does not seem worth the time expenditure given how rarely plugins are expected to fail.
This RFC's discussion settled on it not being worth it.

Plugins using internal/private ESLint APIs are one of the canonical examples of what this process is meant to flag.
However, this process intentionally does not include processes for making code changes in those plugins.
For downstream repositories, this process only proposes how the ESLint team or PR contributors may file issues.
This RFC's intent is that those repositories will drive changing their uses of ESLint APIs.

## Open Questions

Are there other plugins we should include that satisfy the criteria?

## Help Needed

I expect to implement this change.

## Frequently Asked Questions

### Given ESLint respects semver, why add tests for plugins that are relying on internals?

It's exceedingly difficult to be sure when changes to a large published package break contracts with downstream consumers.
Even when all packages in an ecosystem are well-tested the way ESLint and its major plugins are, the sheer project size and duration of maintenance make unfortunate edge cases likely to happen.

> [Venerable xkcd "Workflow" comic](https://xkcd.com/1172)

## Related Discussions

- [Repo: add end-to-end/integration tests for popular 3rd party plugins](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/19139)