rewrite with updated dependencies about js-assessment

[kadamwhite]

Sounds good, @ashleygwilliams -- do you want one of us to tackle this, or do you have bandwidth right now? I'd put in a strong +1 for npm start (and npm test, too, for that measure, once we figure out the command-line testing issues), as an easy way to get up and running without needing to install any global deps or worrying about paths to modules

[ashleygwilliams]

@kadamwhite i basically already have it done :) so i'm happy to do it, but i wanted to get ya'lls opinion

[jamesplease]

Sounds good to me. I could even see this update being reason to bump the version to v1.0.0.

[rmurphey]

👍 from me! This has been in need of an upgrade for a long while.

[kadamwhite]

@jmeas IMO the 1.0 bump would be best matched by a milestone in the perceived scope of what's being tested; if this was a module, for example, I imagine that the content would be an API upgrade and the infrastructural tooling shouldn't change that API.

[rmurphey]

I am +0.5 on bumping to 1.0.0. The fact that this will now be following established, current best practices may be a good enough reason to call it 1.0 -- everything before now has just been a draft :)

[ashleygwilliams]

i'm always hesitant to update to 1.0.0- i'd say let's stick with 0.x and once we've finished our first sweep of cleaning everything up, aim for a 1.0.0, probably around june? maybe we should all have a chat about this, make a roadmap?

i def agree with @kadamwhite that 1.0.0 should probably have to do with a content update, so i'd want to do an audit before we went to 1.0.0. i was also kinda thinking of creating a landing page for this for 1.0.0 with some more developed "instructions" for each test. but that's for another convo

[jamesplease]

Sounds reasonable to me. Let's hold off on the 1.0 update, then.