workbox VS XO

We use the Workbox library and its utilities as a foundation for our service worker.

Btw, Workbox is effectively deprecated now. The dev in charge of it left Google for a real company 6+ months ago and no one has filled his shoes. The other day, the lady who is "maintaining" it now finally acknowledged that nothing is going to happen to it any time soon. https://github.com/GoogleChrome/workbox/issues/3149

Start from the https://github.com/GoogleChrome/workbox

Look into Workbox if you're okay writing code for that or Progressier otherwise.

If you want to try some of these patterns, you can use the https://developers.google.com/web/tools/workbox library that provides all the features out-of-the-box.

Here is an example using workbox.

I recently had a tiny website project which I wanted to make available offline. This is achieved by adding a Service Worker. And thanks to projects like workbox, getting basic functionality like caching for offline-use is fairly easy to set up.

You may be torn between those famous code styles, struggling to choose one between Airbnb JavaScript Style, Google JavaScript Style Guide, JavaScript Standard Style, or XO, among others.

Usually you would pick a config you like and set it up for your project, notable ones are already mentioned but I'll mention more:

- xo https://github.com/xojs/xo

You might enjoy `xo` :) https://github.com/xojs/xo

XO

The developer told me we could not do that because the linter we are using. (XO)[https://github.com/xojs/xo] started complaining.

Real world example: you are using create-react-app, and you want to also to use xo, as both come with their own version of ESLint pre-installed, you could end up with 2 ESLint installed.

One of the biggest hassles to update was the linter we are using: XO, which is a very opinionated, but customizable linter base on ESlint.

Projects: awesome, awesome-nodejs, avajs/ava, xojs/xo