eslint-config-standard-with-typescript deprecated, moved to eslint-config-love

[tabcat]

Getting a deprecation warning after running npm init @eslint/config

The deprecation messages says to use eslint-config-love package instead. It looks like the https://github.com/mightyiam/eslint-config-standard-with-typescript repo has been renamed to eslint-config-love and has the same exact purpose. Could not find any other references or reasoning for the deprecation.

---

---

If this is all that needs to be changed, I'd be happy to open a PR.

create-config/lib/config-generator.js

Line 21 in 1b0d6dd

{ message: "Standard: https://github.com/standard/eslint-config-standard-with-typescript", name: "standard", value: { packageName: "eslint-config-standard-with-typescript", type: "eslintrc" } },

const tsStyleGuides = [
-    { message: "Standard: https://github.com/standard/eslint-config-standard-with-typescript", name: "standard", value: { packageName: "eslint-config-standard-with-typescript", type: "eslintrc" } },
+    { message: "Standard: https://github.com/mightyiam/eslint-config-love", name: "standard", value: { packageName: "eslint-config-love", type: "eslintrc" } },
     { message: "XO: https://github.com/xojs/eslint-config-xo-typescript", name: "xo", value: { packageName: "eslint-config-xo-typescript", type: "eslintrc" } }
 ];

[Delapouite]

Thanks. A related question: should there be a possibility to select None during this question of the initialization wizard?

[aladdin-add]

A related question: should there be a possibility to select None during this question of the initialization wizard?

1. the question won't be asked when you select 1/2:

? How would you like to use ESLint? … 
  To check syntax only
❯ To check syntax and find problems
  To check syntax, find problems, and enforce code style

2. when using the --config, it means "just use this shared config, don't ask any questions". you can see it in the readme.

[aladdin-add]

The brand standard no longer seems applicable; since it's a new brand, I believe we can simply remove it. / @voxpelli

[voxpelli]

See standard/standard#1957 and standard/standard#1948