What are we offering?

[jrans]

So far this REPO and read me is geared up to offer a linter that offers the good parts.

However, we also want to help ensure a consistent style for our developers' code. This goes beyond the good parts and therefore may not be desirable.

We should therefore split off "Stylistic" Linting Rules and enable options to have just good parts or good parts with dwyl style.

@nelsonic @iteles Thoughts?

[nelsonic]

@jrans while I agree that by adding stylistic elements/rules we are going beyond the strict recommendations of "JavaScript The Good Parts" ... we need to decide if that means we cannot "brand" our style as "GoodParts" ... is it enough to add a clarification in the Readme? _or_ do we need to re-name it?

e.g: (i.e. "House Rules")

or:

or

[eliasmalik]

@nelsonic @SimonLab @Shouston3 please see #229 (comment) for the current name of the package and suggest alternatives if you wish.

[nelsonic]

@jrans / @eliasCodes, the choice of Repo & NPM Package name is mean to make it fairly generic.
We need to a bunch of tidying up in the Readme to make it clear that this is JavaScript The Good Parts _and_ some Style-specific rules which we think are practical/sensible for our needs but weren't specified in the Good Parts (book or DC's talks).

We are building this for us first and if anyone else likes it they are welcome to use it.

If only dwyl projects end up using the style I'm 100% fine with that. 👍