[Chore] Remaining Dependency Updates

[vyagh]

Remaining dependency updates from #4668

How to Contribute (Read Carefully)

1. Pick a package
2. Create a sub-issue: For a single package, create a new issue with your implementation plan to address the blocker
3. Discuss: Let maintainers review your implementation plan on your 'sub-issue'
4. Create PR: Only after the maintainers review create and link your PR to both this issue and your sub-issue

Note for New Contributors:
Low-effort items (Cypress, cssnano) are good entry points.

---

Description

Issue #4668 addressed several outdated dependencies. The following updates were completed:

• Babel packages (chore(deps): update @babel packages to 7.28.5 #5149)
• Gulp build tools (chore(deps): update gulp build tools #5200)
• cssnano (chore(deps): update cssnano and remove unused clean-css #5256)
• ESLint (chore(deps): update eslint to 8.57.1 and remove unused packages #5292)

However, several packages require more significant changes and were deferred. This issue tracks those remaining updates and provides implementation options for contributors.

Remaining Updates

1. Jest 29 → 30

Current: 29.7.0 | Latest: 30.x

Blocker: Jest 30 bundles JSDOM 26 which breaks window.location mocking in tests.

---

2. Cypress 14 → 15

Current: 14.5.4 | Latest: 15.x

Blocker: Cypress 15 requires Node.js 20.1+. CI currently uses Node 18.x (now EOL).

---

3. jQuery 2.1.4 → 3.7.1 (Security)

Current: 2.1.4 in index.html | Latest: 3.7.1 (already in lib/)

Blocker: Search functionality depends on jQuery loading synchronously (without defer). Past attempts to defer jQuery loading broke search (#4955, #4987 fixed this by reverting). Upgrading jQuery may introduce similar timing/compatibility issues.

---

4. gulp-prettier 3 → 6

Current: 3.0.0 | Latest: 6.x

Blocker: gulp-prettier 6 requires ES Modules. gulpfile.js uses CommonJS.

---

5. ESLint 8 → 9

Current: 8.57.1 (via #5292) | Latest: 9.x

Blocker: ESLint 9 requires "flat config" format.

---

6. cssnano 6 → 7

Current: 6.1.2 | Latest: 7.x

Blocker: cssnano 7 requires Node.js 18.12+.

---

7. electron 39 → 40

Current: 39.2.7 | Latest: 40.x

Notes: Major version upgrade, needs thorough testing of Electron app functionality.

---

8. express 4 → 5

Current: 4.22.1 | Latest: 5.x

Notes: Major version with API changes.

---

Related

• Original issue: Update outdated dependencies #4668
• Completed PRs: chore(deps): update @babel packages to 7.28.5 #5149, chore(deps): update gulp build tools #5200, chore(deps): update cssnano and remove unused clean-css #5256, chore(deps): update eslint to 8.57.1 and remove unused packages #5292

[vanshika2720]

Hi @vyagh

I would like to work on this issue and submit a fix PR.
Please consider this issue as taken — I am currently working on it.

Thanks!

[vyagh]

Hi @vanshika2720
I'll have to ask you to go through the Issue description properly, this is not a bug fix or feature improvement.
I am a bit confused about what Issue did you reproduce locally?

Please take a look at contribution guidelines, as you don't require any permission to work on Issues here.
You also can not mark an issue "taken", we seek the best implementation.

[vanshika2720]

Hi @vyagh , thanks for the clarification.

Apologies for the confusion earlier — you’re right, this issue is strictly about completing the remaining dependency upgrades, not a bug fix or feature work. When I mentioned reproducing an issue locally, that was a misunderstanding on my part and not relevant to this tracker.

To clarify my intent and current status:

• I focused on the remaining deferred dependency updates listed in [Chore] Remaining Dependency Updates #5364, consolidating them into a single PR (chore(deps): comprehensive dependency updates - all remaining from #5364 #5371).
• The PR addresses all listed blockers (ESLint 9 flat config, gulp-prettier ESM migration, Jest 30 JSDOM changes, Node version requirements, etc.) and documents the implementation approach and testing for each.
• All updates were tested locally in a compatible Node.js environment, and the full test suite passes.

I understand that issues here aren’t “claimed,” and I appreciate the reminder about contribution expectations. Please feel free to evaluate the PR purely on its technical merit — happy to make any changes or split it further if that aligns better with project preferences.

Thanks for the guidance, and appreciate the review.
@walterbender

[vyagh]

@vanshika2720 I want to point you towards "how to contribute" section of this Issue.
these are package/dependency updates which need feedback from maintainers, that's why walter wanted contributors to come up with their "sub-issues" containing implementation plans, to which feedback is required.

So creating a single PR with aggregated updates will make the whole process very difficult to review and test, can you try to follow this plan for individual packages listed above?

[vanshika2720]

Thanks for pointing that out, @vyagh — I understand the intent of the “How to Contribute” section more clearly now.

You’re right: aggregating all remaining dependency updates into a single PR makes review and testing harder, especially when each upgrade has its own blockers and trade-offs that require maintainer feedback.

To align with the intended workflow, I’ll do the following:

Split the current aggregated PR into separate, focused PRs, one per dependency (or logical group where appropriate).

For each package, create a dedicated sub-issue outlining the implementation plan, known blockers, and testing approach, so feedback can be gathered before finalizing the changes.

Thanks for the clarification and for taking the time to explain the process — I appreciate the guidance and will restructure the work to make it easier to review.