search

WordPress / WordPress-Coding-Standards

PHP_CodeSniffer rules (sniffs) to enforce WordPress coding conventions
MIT License
2.57k stars 488 forks source link

Switch Dependency from squizlabs/php_codesniffer to PHPCSStandards/PHP_CodeSniffer #2425

Closed kopepasah closed 9 months ago

kopepasah commented 9 months ago

Rationale

With the official abandonment of the squizlabs/php_codesniffer project, the WPCS repository must plan to switch the dependency to the new official home of the PHPCS repository: PHPCSStandards/PHP_CodeSniffer

References

Action Checklist

kopepasah commented 9 months ago

I am uncertain what items belong in the Action Checklist. From a quick review, I can see that the PHPCSStandards/PHP_CodeSniffer project is still publishing its package to squizlabs/php_codesniffer, so there could be no action required.

However, since the squizlabs project is abandoned, it may be benficial (if not at least clearer) that the package is no longer maintained by squizlabs.

jrfnl commented 9 months ago

Closing as duplicate of something which has already been handled. See #2408

Please search before opening issues. Oh and in this case: please read the actual announcement + the release notes of the PHPCS 3.8.0 release and don't open tickets like this in other repos. This ticket is just noise which will confuse people with misinformation.

kopepasah commented 9 months ago

Thanks for the information, @jrfnl, and thanks for handling this big shift.

FWIW, a developer shouldn't have to read through release notes and issues to understand there is no need to switch away from the squizlabs/php_codesniffer when using Composer. Especially when it could more clearly be communicated in this repo's documentation AND the documented actual announcement itself contains misleading information.

jrfnl commented 9 months ago

FWIW developers who don't read release notes would never have heard about the repo take over anyway, so that is a non-issue.

And I don't see any "misleading information"in the announcement ? You mean it is not clear that a stricken through message accompanied with a clearly marked update in bold, means that information which was in the original announcement was superseded five days later ? Not sure how that could be made clearer.

Not sure what should be communicated about this in this repo's docs, but feel free to submit a pull request if you think things can be improved...