feat: bump npm dependency ranges

[bradzacher]

PR Checklist

• Steps in Contributing were taken

Overview

• Update the dependencies to the max minors
• Update stylelint to its latest major
• Commit the yarn update interactive plugin
• Add docs about doing manual dep bumps

[typescript-eslint]

Thanks for the PR, @bradzacher!

typescript-eslint is a 100% community driven project, and we are incredibly grateful that you are contributing to that community.

The core maintainers work on this in their personal time, so please understand that it may not be possible for them to review your work immediately.

Thanks again!

---

🙏 Please, if you or your company is finding typescript-eslint valuable, help us sustain the project by sponsoring it transparently on https://opencollective.com/typescript-eslint.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for typescript-eslint ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	6e45568
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/typescript-eslint/deploys/661322c912e95e0008ce7cf9
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-8860--typescript-eslint.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.
Lighthouse	1 paths audited Performance: 99 (🟢 up 8 from production) Accessibility: 100 (no change from production) Best Practices: 92 (no change from production) SEO: 98 (no change from production) PWA: 80 (no change from production) View the detailed breakdown and full score reports

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[nx-cloud]

☁️ Nx Cloud Report

CI is running/has finished running commands for commit 6e45568. As they complete they will appear below. Click to see the status, the terminal output, and the build insights.

📂 See all runs for this CI Pipeline Execution

---

✅ Successfully ran 31 targets

• nx test eslint-plugin
• nx test typescript-estree
• nx test visitor-keys
• nx test type-utils
• nx test utils
• nx run types:build
• nx test scope-manager
• nx test typescript-eslint
• nx run repo-tools:postinstall-script
• nx test repo-tools
• nx test rule-schema-to-typescript-types
• nx test eslint-plugin --coverage=false
• nx test parser
• nx test eslint-plugin-internal
• nx run-many --target=lint --parallel --exclude eslint-plugin
• nx test utils --coverage=false
• nx test ast-spec
• nx test visitor-keys --coverage=false
• nx run-many --target=build --parallel --exclude=website --exclude=website-eslint
• nx run integration-tests:test
• nx test typescript-estree --coverage=false
• nx test type-utils --coverage=false
• nx test scope-manager --coverage=false
• nx run-many --target=typecheck --parallel
• nx test repo-tools --coverage=false
• nx test typescript-eslint --coverage=false
• nx test eslint-plugin-internal --coverage=false
• nx test parser --coverage=false
• nx test rule-schema-to-typescript-types --coverage=false
• nx test ast-spec --coverage=false
• nx run repo-tools:generate-configs

---

Sent with 💌 from NxCloud.

[levrik]

There's something weird about 1.3.0 of ts-api-utils. Source code of this version does not exist on GitHub.
Also npm flags it when executing npm audit (see JoshuaKGoldberg/ts-api-utils#403).
Given the recent events with the XZ Utils backdoor, I would advise to pin this dependency to the last known version (1.2.1) to avoid any risks.

[bradzacher]

@JoshuaKGoldberg is a maintainer of this project so can respond

[bradzacher]

Though looking at it - there is provenance data for v1.3.0
https://www.npmjs.com/package/ts-api-utils/v/1.3.0#provenance
So it's verified as being published by the github action.

[levrik]

@bradzacher And this is the linked GitHub Actions run: https://github.com/JoshuaKGoldberg/ts-api-utils/actions/runs/8214871649/job/22467737771.

This again looks a bit suspicious...

WARNING Unable to verify if user joshuakgoldberg is a collaborator for ts-api-utils.

Unsure about the rollback of pushing the tag below. But looks a bit a bit weird at least as well.

[JoshuaKGoldberg]

I'm under the impression it was a transient npm issue, as mentioned in the ts-api-utils issue. I manually verified the code published matched what we expected from source. I'd encourage you to do the same if you're nervous about the release.

[JoshuaKGoldberg]

Oh, and this isn't the only package that had the same odd issue: nodemailer/nodemailer#1634