Can you explain a bit more? I don't understand your point on the js package (p.s. I'm not familiar with js)

So, instead of having a separate .eslintrc file, there are defined presets that can be leveraged via custom configuration objects in package.json, [like Gemfile, requirements.txt, etc., but for JS].

Example from airbnb: https://github.com/airbnb/javascript/tree/master/packages/eslint-config-airbnb

package.json

eslintConfig
{
   "extends": "airbnb/base"
}

👍 !!

I have this .editorconfig file duplicated in hundreds of repos...

☝️ Yep. That's exactly the problem I'm hoping to solve.

It makes sense for me. This seems like a editorconfig-core-js specific issue.... Can we move the discussion there?

Done. editorconfig/editorconfig-core-js#31

It's not specific to JS. That was just an example. For presets to be actually usable, they need to be supported by all EditorConfig implementations, not just the JS one. It should work even if I for example use the EditorConfig Sublime plugin.

I'm thinking:

# .editorconfig
extends = path/to/folder/containing/editorconfig/file

(Putting EditorConfig config into package.json should be a separate issue, on this issue tracker, as it also pertains to all implementation).

@sindresorhus I'm all for consolidation. What about a global in ~/.config/editorconfig?

@kevinSuttle That doesn't really solve my issue of having to put an .editorconfig file in every repo. The point is that other users follows it, not me. You can already put a .editorconfig file in ~/ if you don't put root = true in your local .editorconfig files.

Ah, I did not know that. I was thinking more of the global ~/.gitignore and ~/.npmrc so an .editorconfig file doesn't have to be present in every repo.

But I see your point about ensuring others follow suit and apply the same settings when the repo is distributed.

I agree with @sindresorhus , it is exactly the reason we don't support a "global" configuration file.

@sindresorhus If we have an "extends" or "include" instruction, is the package.json issue still relevant?

@xuhdev Yes. See above #245 (comment)

If we have an "extends" or "include" instruction, is the package.json issue still relevant?

Yes, but that's a discussion for a different issue, but tl;dr; I have so many metafiles (.editorconfig, .gitignore, .gitattributes, etc) in my repos and I would like to reduce that number. Would be nice if I could define EditorConfig config in package.json instead of an .editorconfig file, since I almost always have a package.json file in my repos. Many other tools supports this.

One useful usecase could be to commit a "company" wide editorconfig so it is not global for the computer but just the company repos.
For a node project the common way would be to publish an npm package containing the editorconfig preset and to add an extends/include/whatever instruction in the .editorconfig file to 'node_modules/mycompany-editorconfig/.editorconfig'

Is this a duplicate of #236?

If @sindresorhus indeed reopened the issue for #245 (comment), then, yes, it looks like a duplicate of #236.

Hearing nothing to the contrary, I am going to re-close this as duplicate to keep the discussion centralized in #236.