Update dependencies

[fricklerhandwerk]

Update to markdown-it 8.2.0 fixes #319.

Edit: Is there a reason we don't test against Node 7?

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 58.211% when pulling b38900402633847b5f88ee268af1a0a0ec744b16 on fricklerhandwerk:olio-theme into c52a482e5392849de12ce1cf43245ad66da44745 on danielgtaylor:olio-theme.

[kadishmal]

Please remove all ^ from the package.json to avoid future breakage.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 58.211% when pulling a97a5b00cd7de1452e2352c4c64b47d3fa4c2840 on fricklerhandwerk:olio-theme into c52a482e5392849de12ce1cf43245ad66da44745 on danielgtaylor:olio-theme.

[fricklerhandwerk]

Sorry for the codecov spam - was push --forceing. But you must be kidding me, the tests fail non-deterministically.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 58.211% when pulling 85e194cf932132a2b54667ca4dfcd62f001de5b7 on fricklerhandwerk:olio-theme into c52a482e5392849de12ce1cf43245ad66da44745 on danielgtaylor:olio-theme.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 58.211% when pulling 85e194cf932132a2b54667ca4dfcd62f001de5b7 on fricklerhandwerk:olio-theme into c52a482e5392849de12ce1cf43245ad66da44745 on danielgtaylor:olio-theme.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 58.211% when pulling 85e194cf932132a2b54667ca4dfcd62f001de5b7 on fricklerhandwerk:olio-theme into c52a482e5392849de12ce1cf43245ad66da44745 on danielgtaylor:olio-theme.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 58.211% when pulling 85e194cf932132a2b54667ca4dfcd62f001de5b7 on fricklerhandwerk:olio-theme into c52a482e5392849de12ce1cf43245ad66da44745 on danielgtaylor:olio-theme.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 58.211% when pulling 85e194cf932132a2b54667ca4dfcd62f001de5b7 on fricklerhandwerk:olio-theme into c52a482e5392849de12ce1cf43245ad66da44745 on danielgtaylor:olio-theme.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 58.211% when pulling ba72af2ffef488cca089c5cbd055f40e0a67d1b8 on fricklerhandwerk:olio-theme into c52a482e5392849de12ce1cf43245ad66da44745 on danielgtaylor:olio-theme.

[jackbentley]

What's the reasoning behind remove the ^? (I'm not familiar with npm dep. management, and it seems like an odd thing to do).

Could you address jade, too, while you're at it? 😄

[fricklerhandwerk]

@jackbentley LMGTFY http://stackoverflow.com/a/22345808

jade would be a different PR, because you have to change the library calls in the code. Not a big deal though.

[jackbentley]

@fricklerhandwerk So, it's the same as it is in composer. Which is why I asked why remove them? Wouldn't it cause conflicts with other packages as well as us having to manually update the dependencies for any bug fixes upstream. If the packages follow semver, there's no reason not to use carets.

As for jade, that makes sense. I forgot that imports etc would be different! Haha

Edit: not to mention that removing them has broken the build by the looks of things.

[kadishmal]

If the packages follow semver, there's no reason not to use carets.

That's the point. If the packages follow semver. As you notice this PR resolves #319 which was opened because the module developer didn't care enough to follow the semver. That breaks much of other developers' release cycle. For some, this is very important.

[jackbentley]

@kadishmal apologies for not reading properly/misunderstanding the PR description. However...

1. The module should probably be set to ~2.6.0 in this case. There may be a future back-ported version that would be nice to have. I personally feel you shouldn't need to specifically reference a version unless there is a very specific case. Half the point of having a package manager is being able to pull in code changes without finding and updating each version number. Otherwise we would probably just be using git submodules, if we didn't need that.
2. I was referring to ALL the carets being removed in the latest commit. I'm sure we'll-known and widely-used packages like less, coffee-script, etc are likely to follow semver well.