Docs: Mention Stylistic as the source of replacement rules for all the stylistic rules that got deprecated

[danfuzz]

Docs page(s)

https://eslint.org/docs/latest/rules/#deprecated

What documentation issue do you want to solve?

In the "deprecated rules" section, the ESLint docs sometimes indicate what a deprecated rule is replaced by. However, in the case of the rules that moved to Stylistic, there's no indication that that's where to find them.

I noticed this because, while perusing the docs, I was surprised that semi was deprecated with no apparent-in-the-docs replacement. Since deprecated rules aren't linked to their documentation page, it took a bit of spelunking to figure out what happened. To be clear, the documentation page at https://eslint.org/docs/latest/rules/semi does indicate where to find the replacement, but there's no link to that page from the main rules page.

What do you think is the correct solution?

I'd like the ESLint "rules" page to prominently link to Stylistic on each of the deprecated rules for which that would be appropriate. Perhaps the links to the deprecated rules' doc pages should be restored too?

Participation

• I am willing to submit a pull request for this change.

Additional comments

(I'm only reluctant to submit a pull request because I am not convinced I know how to efficiently fix all the docs in a way that the project would deem acceptable.)

[Rec0iL99]

Hi @danfuzz, thanks for the issue. Just to confirm, this request is to link to the specific @stylistic plugin rule doc page from the main latest/rules/#deprecated page, right?

Something like this?

Technically, these rules are not replaced by another rule in the core. They have just been moved to a 3rd party plugin. Maybe the wording could be different.

[amareshsm]

Hi @danfuzz, thanks for the issue. Just to confirm, this request is to link to the specific @stylistic plugin rule doc page from the main latest/rules/#deprecated page, right?

Something like this?

Technically, these rules are not replaced by another rule in the core. They have just been moved to a 3rd party plugin. Maybe the wording could be different.

I guess the request is to add both

1. Link to deprecated docs page
2. link to the specific @Stylistic plugin rule doc page
   like this:

[Tanujkanti4441]

This change is a good idea, otherwise the deprecated rules that are moved to some plugin are not linked anywhere, and the link to the stylistic plugin is inside the individual docs of deprecated rules and one have to use URL to find them.

Instead of replaced by we may write something like 'moved to'

[bmish]

I'd love to use a rule's meta.deprecated and meta.replacedBy properties to indicate the replacement rule when a rule is moved out of core. I actually wrote up a proposal of how we could support additional information in these properties that would be useful for generating the documentation needed:

• Change Request: Support additional rule metadata for deprecations #18061

As a side note, I actually disagree with the change to remove such information that occurred in:

• Fix: remove custom plugins from replacedBy metadata #13274

[Rec0iL99]

ping @eslint/eslint-team

[nzakas]

We actually mention the replacement rules on the rule page for all deprecated rules, like this:
https://eslint.org/docs/latest/rules/comma-spacing

So, not opposed to surfacing that information on the rule index page, but we don't have the infrastructure in place to do that right now, so we'd need something like #18061 in place first.

[JoshuaKGoldberg]

+1 from me on this issue. Going through https://eslint.org/docs/latest/rules anew, it does feel surprising that there's no link that reaches a page explaining where those rules went.

Additional +1 from me on making the meta.deprecated property richer so these can be more automatically generated.

Edit: heh, posted at about the same time as #18053 (comment). +1 to that.

[nzakas]

Just a reminder to everyone on the team: please don't just comment on issues, we should be moving them through the triage board.

Because it seems like there is support for this one the team, I'm marking as accepted as moving to "Blocked" pending #18061