@brody4hire - C. Jonathan Brody

I think we should address this in the next major release.

> - [CB-13834](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-13834) - problem building with build with params `--release --bundle --archs="x64 x86 arm"` on AppVeyor CI *which remains unsolved* now reported in GH-290

I would definitely favor adding prettier, just updated the title to reflect this idea. When using eslint we generally like to use [`eslint-config-semistandard`](https://www.npmjs.com/package/eslint-config-semistandard), which is basically [`standard`](https://www.npmjs.com/package/standard) but with semicolons...

> I found [...] I meant [`eslint-config-prettier-standard`](https://www.npmjs.com/package/eslint-config-prettier-standard), which does use [prettier](https://github.com/prettier/prettier) & [prettier / eslint-config-prettier](https://github.com/prettier/eslint-config-prettier) as suggested above, just fixed my comment. There was some interesting discussion in & .

I just raised WIP PR #39 to introduce eslint & prettier, using [`prettier-eslint-cli`](https://www.npmjs.com/package/prettier-eslint-cli) instead of [`eslint-config-prettier`](https://www.npmjs.com/package/eslint-config-prettier). The issue [`eslint-config-prettier`](https://www.npmjs.com/package/eslint-config-prettier) is that it disables a number of eslint rules from [`standard`](https://www.npmjs.com/package/standard)...

Thanks guys for the feedback. I raised this issue in order to help get the ball rolling and avoid losing track of this task or any information related to it....

Thanks for the feedback. This plugin is now part of a more general discussion in . I would favor continuing to support this plugin for a while, at least. Does...

~~It looks like this was reported in [CB-13834](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-13834). Can we close [CB-13834](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-13834) as a duplicate, migrated issue?~~ As discussed in GH-288 (#288) and in [CB-13834](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-13834) it looks like this issue...

FYI agreement was already reached in [[1]](https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/7f92561d382f143aaf49e083bbe215dcf95a3f4d8b6e3cbb6089a5f3@%3Cdev.cordova.apache.org%3E). [1]

Thanks, this definitely needs investigation. A PR with proper test cases would be welcome.