chore(deps): update dependencies (non-major)

[renovate]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Change	Age	Adoption	Passing	Confidence
markdownlint-cli	^0.38.0 -> ^0.39.0
prettier (source)	^3.2.4 -> ^3.2.5
stylelint (source)	^16.2.0 -> ^16.2.1
yarn (source)	4.0.2 -> 4.1.0

---

Release Notes

igorshubovych/markdownlint-cli (markdownlint-cli)

v0.39.0: 0.39.0

Compare Source

• Update markdownlint dependency to 0.33.0
  • Add MD055/table-pipe-style, MD056/table-column-count
  • Improve MD005/MD007/MD024/MD026/MD038
  • Incorporate micromark-extension-directive
  • Improve JSON schema, document validation
• Handle trailing commas in JSONC configuration
• Update all dependencies via Dependabot

prettier/prettier (prettier)

v3.2.5

Compare Source

diff

Support Angular inline styles as single template literal (#​15968 by @​sosukesuzuki)

Angular v17 supports single string inline styles.

// Input
@​Component({
  template: `<div>...</div>`,
  styles: `h1 { color: blue; }`,
})
export class AppComponent {}

// Prettier 3.2.4
@&#8203;Component({
  template: `<div>...</div>`,
  styles: `h1 { color: blue; }`,
})
export class AppComponent {}

// Prettier 3.2.5
@&#8203;Component({
  template: `<div>...</div>`,
  styles: `
    h1 {
      color: blue;
    }
  `,
})
export class AppComponent {}

Unexpected embedded formatting for Angular template (#​15969 by @​JounQin)

Computed template should not be considered as Angular component template

// Input
const template = "foobar";

@​Component({
  [template]: `<h1>{{       hello }}</h1>`,
})
export class AppComponent {}

// Prettier 3.2.4
const template = "foobar";

@&#8203;Component({
  [template]: `<h1>{{ hello }}</h1>`,
})
export class AppComponent {}

// Prettier 3.2.5
const template = "foobar";

@&#8203;Component({
  [template]: `<h1>{{       hello }}</h1>`,
})
export class AppComponent {}

Use "json" parser for tsconfig.json by default (#​16012 by @​sosukesuzuki)

In v2.3.0, we introduced "jsonc" parser which adds trialing comma by default.

When adding a new parser we also define how it will be used based on the linguist-languages data.

tsconfig.json is a special file used by TypeScript, it uses .json file extension, but it actually uses the JSON with Comments syntax. However, we found that there are many third-party tools not recognize it correctly because of the confusing .json file extension.

We decide to treat it as a JSON file for now to avoid the extra configuration step.

To keep using the "jsonc" parser for your tsconfig.json files, add the following to your .pretterrc file

{
  "overrides": [
    {
      "files": ["tsconfig.json", "jsconfig.json"],
      "options": {
        "parser": "jsonc"
      }
    }
  ]
}

stylelint/stylelint (stylelint)

v16.2.1

Compare Source

• Fixed: report flags not reporting on subsequent runs when cache is used (#​7483) (@​ybiquitous).
• Fixed: custom-property-no-missing-var-function false positives for properties that can contain author-defined identifiers (#​7478) (@​ybiquitous).
• Fixed: selector-pseudo-class-no-unknown false positives for :seeking, the media loading state and sound state pseudo-classes (#​7490) (@​Mouvedia).
• Fixed: selector-max-specificity false positives with ignoreSelectors option for of <selector> syntax (#​7475) (@​ybiquitous).
• Fixed: function-calc-no-unspaced-operator performance (#​7505) (@​ybiquitous).
• Fixed: validateOptions to report when secondary option object is an empty object or null (#​7476) (@​ybiquitous).
• Fixed: report() error message responsibility for a missing node or line number (#​7474) (@​ybiquitous).

yarnpkg/berry (yarn)

v4.1.0

Compare Source

• Tweaks -,--verbose in yarn workspaces foreach; -v will now only print the prefixes, -vv will be necessary to also print the timings.

• Adds a new --json option to yarn run when called without script name

• Fixes node-modules linker link: dependencies mistreatment as inner workspaces, when they point to a parent folder of a workspace

• Fixes spurious "No candidates found" errors

• Fixes missing executable permissions when using nodeLinker: pnpm

• Fixes packages being incorrectly flagged as optional

• Fixes cache key corruptions due to uncontrolled git merges

• Fixes yarn version apply --all --dry-run making unexpected changes

• Fixes yarn npm login when the remote registry is Verdaccio

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - "every weekend" in timezone Asia/Shanghai, Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 Automerge: Enabled.

♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

👻 Immortal: This PR will be recreated if closed unmerged. Get config help if that's undesired.

---

• If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

---

This PR has been generated by Mend Renovate. View repository job log here.

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 8 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +4 -4
Percentile : 3.2%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.yml : +1 -1
.json : +3 -3

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[socket-security]

New and removed dependencies detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎

Package	New capabilities	Transitives	Size	Publisher
npm/[email protected]	None	+1	63.5 kB	vitaly
npm/[email protected]	Transitive: environment, filesystem	+6	1.48 MB	vitaly
npm/[email protected]	Transitive: environment, filesystem, shell	+47	6.08 MB	davidanson
npm/[email protected]	None	0	451 kB	davidanson
npm/[email protected]	Transitive: environment, filesystem	+8	2.62 MB	davidanson
npm/[email protected]	None	0	37.5 kB	vitaly
npm/[email protected]	None	0	33.5 kB	google-wombot
npm/[email protected]	None	0	8.07 kB	vitaly

🚮 Removed packages: npm/[email protected], npm/[email protected], npm/[email protected], npm/[email protected], npm/[email protected], npm/[email protected], npm/[email protected]

View full report↗︎

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 10 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +5 -5
Percentile : 4%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.yml : +1 -1
.json : +4 -4

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 10 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +5 -5
Percentile : 4%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.yml : +1 -1
.json : +4 -4

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 16 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +8 -8
Percentile : 6.4%

Total files changed: 4

Change summary by file extension:
.yml : +1 -1
.md : +3 -3
.json : +4 -4

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.