Change Request: report unnecessary config overrides

ESLint version

v8.5.0

What problem do you want to solve?

1. I extend a shared config in the root / I set a rule in the root
2. I override a rule from the shared config, or add a rule not present in the shared config / I override a rule set by the root in a nested config or override
3. Later, the shared config changes such that the local rule configuration is a unused, ie, prevents no warnings / Later, I change config in the root such that the nested config or override is unused, ie, prevents no warnings

The problem is that it’s really difficult to figure out when the third step applies.

What do you think is the correct solution?

Like the reportUnusedDisableDirectives config option, I would like a config option that reports unnecessary configuration - in other words, any configuration that exists that matches the existing inferred configuration.

Participation

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

Additional comments

I’d need many pointers to submit a PR for this, but I’m happy to help where I can.

(filed based on https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/15466#issuecomment-1003467207)

[nzakas]

It’s not a flaw, it’s an intentional design decision. We no longer want ESLint to have to load modules. Instead, we want you to use import, require, etc. to pull in what you want and place it into the config array. That’s how we will escape the shared config loading hell we can get stuck in right now.

I think the best course forward right now is just to wait until we have the new config system ready for testing and see what would make sense.

[ljharb]

The unfortunate aspect of that design decision is that it will no longer be possible to have a static configuration.