Possibility to rename n to node2

[giltayar]

Sorry for the bikeshedding, but "n" sounds a bit minimal. Especially in the ESlint configuration rules.

I believe any name would be suboptimal, but having the weird node in the name would, I believe be beneficial.

Something like node2 or node-new?

[voxpelli]

I would prefer sticking to the current name rather than causing more fragmentation.

Changing names of a module is hard to do without breaking all of the update flows of dependent projects.

[aladdin-add]

I agreed the current name is not ideal(I tried eslint-plugin-nd while it has been taken ＞︿＜). As of now, I'm standing with @voxpelli - It's not always an easy thing to renaming a package, for users and maintainers.

[giltayar]

Good to hear that people are already using this package! Once I get the esm resolution in, I'll probably also migrate our company to use this fork.

Thanks for the hard work, and closing for lack of public interest. ☺️

[gpoole]

Just to throw in my 2c as a random user: I was about to open a PR on the eslint-config-standard readme because I thought the sample command to install peer dependencies had a typo in it. The name looking like a truncated version of an existing well-known package name is bound to be confusing people.

While it is a pain to rename it's only going to get harder as time goes on. Leaving the old package name published with a deprecation notice and publishing under a new name shouldn't be too bad should it? No different to publishing a major release in terms of work needed by people downstream?

[aladdin-add]

but we (other contributors) don't have the access to publish the old one- if we do, I'd prefer taking over, instead of forking. 😂

[gpoole]

Do you mean to publish eslint-plugin-n or the original eslint-plugin-node?

[aladdin-add]

eslint-plugin-node.

[gpoole]

I meant that the discussion here seemed to be saying that you can't rename this module from eslint-plugin-n because it will break things? I was asking is publishing a deprecation notice under eslint-plugin-n and publishing this under something less ambiguous like eslint-plugin-node2 so bad? Better yet what about a scoped name like @eslint-community/eslint-plugin-node as per #8? I think it would help a lot with comprehension over the current name.

Again I came here specifically for the same reason as @giltayar mentioned in the original issue: I was confused by the name because it looked like a mistake to me and wanted to suggest changing it to avoid confusion.

[aladdin-add]

I'm 👍 to @eslint-community/eslint-plugin-node. just waiting for the @eslint-community get ready.

[giltayar]

+1 for anything but eslint-plugin-n. 😃

[voxpelli]

The current name works until @eslint-community/eslint-plugin-node or merging into upstream becomes a possibility.

[voxpelli]

As I commented in #8, there is now an ESLint RFC up regarding creating the @eslint-community: eslint/rfcs#91