feat: bump (dev)Dependencies, fix: consider first jsx node as open tag - close #272

[JounQin]

fix #272

the parsed remark-mdx jsx nodes are not precise, but it will be resolved in v2

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #273 (a997291) into master (dd0227f) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##            master      #273   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           19        19           
  Lines          424       436   +12     
  Branches        79        82    +3     
=========================================
+ Hits           424       436   +12     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
packages/eslint-mdx/src/helper.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/eslint-mdx/src/parser.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/eslint-mdx/src/regexp.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/eslint-mdx/src/traverse.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...slint-plugin-mdx/src/rules/no-jsx-html-comments.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...lint-plugin-mdx/src/rules/no-unescaped-entities.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/eslint-plugin-mdx/src/rules/remark.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update dd0227f...a997291. Read the comment docs.

[JounQin]

@wooorm @ChristianMurphy

[wooorm]

@JounQin What’s the reason for the ping? A code review or something else? If the first: I’ve never really looked into the code of this project much and this PR also seems to contain several code-style changes, so this looks okay but I’m not really sure what part I should focus on?

[JounQin]

@wooorm I've highlighted the important changes at #273 (comment) .

[wooorm]

I’m generally fine with this, because I trust your opinion more that mine on this project! I’d guess the // prettier-ignore line above it might be a bad sign though, so maybe some extra tests to check that it works would be good

[JounQin]

I’m generally fine with this, because I trust your opinion more that mine on this project! I’d guess the // prettier-ignore line above it might be a bad sign though, so maybe some extra tests to check that it works would be good

Did you mean the following istanbul ignore next? It should be moved to https://github.com/mdx-js/eslint-mdx/blob/master/packages/eslint-mdx/src/traverse.ts#L80 actually.

And // prettier-ignore is used to prevent istanbul ignore next comment moving to wrong place.

---

See 5813078

[JounQin]

@mdx-js/releasers Please help to release a new version.

[JounQin]

@wooorm Any time to cut a release?

[wooorm]

Released!