{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TWExchangeSolutions/eslint-config-exchange-solutions/issues/13","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TWExchangeSolutions/eslint-config-exchange-solutions","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TWExchangeSolutions/eslint-config-exchange-solutions/issues/13/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TWExchangeSolutions/eslint-config-exchange-solutions/issues/13/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TWExchangeSolutions/eslint-config-exchange-solutions/issues/13/events","html_url":"https://github.com/TWExchangeSolutions/eslint-config-exchange-solutions/issues/13","id":133360357,"number":13,"title":"Re: props.children and props.className","user":{"login":"stevematney","id":1235376,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1235376?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevematney","html_url":"https://github.com/stevematney","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevematney/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevematney/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevematney/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevematney/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevematney/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevematney/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevematney/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevematney/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevematney/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2016-02-12T22:38:25Z","updated_at":"2016-02-12T22:38:25Z","closed_at":null,"body":"These properties have implied definitions in pretty much all React components. Should we really be requiring that they're defined in the `propTypes` definitions? That seems excessive."}}