add details_menu_migration linter #2148
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: a27a451 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
keithamus
force-pushed
the
add-details-menu-migration-linter
branch
from
4a13ce4
to
fda64c6
Compare
keithamus
force-pushed
the
add-details-menu-migration-linter
branch
from
fda64c6
to
8856fec
Compare
keithamus
force-pushed
the
add-details-menu-migration-linter
branch
from
8856fec
to
dae7495
Compare
keithamus
force-pushed
the
add-details-menu-migration-linter
branch
from
dae7495
to
32b281c
Compare
keithamus
force-pushed
the
add-details-menu-migration-linter
branch
from
32b281c
to
76b8093
Compare
keithamus
force-pushed
the
add-details-menu-migration-linter
branch
from
76b8093
to
89b97b4
Compare
keithamus
force-pushed
the
add-details-menu-migration-linter
branch
from
89b97b4
to
db2736a
Compare
This resolves an Uninitialized Constant error coming from ruby, because `ERBLint::Linter::Primer::` is a namespace that exists. This error was not invoked before because the only liner in that namespace - `ERBLint::Linter::Primer::Accessibility::TooltippedMigration` in the `tooltipped_migration.rb` file - would load _after_ `argument_mappers/label.rb` and `label_component_migration_counter.rb`. The introduction of `ERBLint::Linter::Primer::Accessibility::DetailsMenuMigration` in the `details_menu_migration.rb` file would load _before_ `label_component_migration_counter.rb`, populating the `ERBLint::Linter::Primer` namespace, which then causes the failed scope lookup. Prepending `::` to these values tells ruby to always look in the root scope, not any local constants.
keithamus
force-pushed
the
add-details-menu-migration-linter
branch
from
db2736a
to
a27a451
Compare
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What are you trying to accomplish?
This adds a new linter to catch uses of
<details-menu>which is likely from https://github.com/github/details-menu-element/. We'd like people to migrate becausePrimer::Alpha::ActionMenuoffers better ergonomics and better support for assistive technologies, as well as more robust focus management.Screenshots
N/A
Integration
Code in production will need to disable this rule, or disable each violation of this rule individually.
List the issues that this change affects.
Closes https://github.com/github/accessibility/issues/3730. Refs https://github.com/github/primer/issues/2417
Risk Assessment
What approach did you choose and why?
This one.
Anything you want to highlight for special attention from reviewers?
Accessibility
Merge checklist
Added/updated documentationAdded/updated previews (Lookbook)Tested in ChromeTested in FirefoxTested in SafariTested in EdgeTake a look at the What we look for in reviews section of the contributing guidelines for more information on how we review PRs.