npm test is not failing CI builds

[filfreire]

Example:
https://travis-ci.org/yegor256/tacit/builds/500324652

Failing checks:

scss/_grid.scss
  72:3  warning  Expected `float`, found `width`  property-sort-order
  73:3  warning  Expected `width`, found `float`  property-sort-order
✖ 2 problems (0 errors, 2 warnings)

Did not fail the build.

[0crat]

Job #195 is now in scope, role is DEV

[filfreire]

Also same happens for Appveyor,
https://ci.appveyor.com/project/yegor256/tacit/builds/22747531

[0crat]

Bug was reported, see §29: +15 point(s) just awarded to @filfreire/z

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[alex-semenyuk]

@filfreire There is a problem with this in grunt-sass-lint. We can use --max-warnings=0 for this purpose from sass-lint, but there is a bug sasstools/grunt-sass-lint#25 and we can't pass this param. Option set severity for each rule to 2, which means to recognize them as error, looks not good.

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@filfreire/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #195; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)