Fix ESLint errors for internal tool packages

[jeremymeng]

Nice to have
The following internal tools/tests still ignore ESLint errors.

• common\tools\dev-tool
• sdk\eventhub\mock-hub
• sdk\test-utils\recorder-new
• sdk\test-utils\testing-recorder-new
• sdk\test-utils\perfstress
• sdk\storage\perf-tests\storage-blob-track-1
• sdk\test-utils\recorder
• sdk\storage\perf-tests\storage-file-share-track-1

We have special eslint configuration file to be used to lint internal packages: https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-js/blob/main/sdk/.eslintrc.internal.json

An example of using it can be found in Text Analytics perf tests.

We should fix ESLint errors for each of them. Feel free to send separate PRs for each package. Following are the steps to run ESLint for these packages and reproduce this issue.

1. Set up your dev environment if not already done so as mentioned here
2. Go to any of the folders above
3. run rushx lint
4. Command in step 2 generates an html report in the same folder with name that ends with lintReport.html
5. All lint errors found in this package is listed on html report.

Once all known issues are resolved, below change is required in package.json file the same folder to treat any new lint regression as hard failure in CI.

• Remove following snippet from lint command in package.json
-f html -o <package name>-lintReport.html || exit 0

Note: HTML report name prefix may be different for each package name to differentiate the report for each package.

[timovv]

Reopening this for the moment since there are still a few more packages to go.

[deyaaeldeen]

We have special eslint configuration file to be used to lint internal packages: https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-js/blob/main/sdk/.eslintrc.internal.json

An example of using it can be found in Text Analytics perf tests.

[timovv]

The track 1 perf tests aren't currently built by CI, so enabling the linter in this way won't do anything. And I believe we're planning on combining the recorder-new package and the old recorder package sometime in the near future, so it may be worth holding off on enabling the linter until that stage. I think this issue can now be closed, unless there's any objection.

[ramya-rao-a]

Sounds good to me