Dedicated Remark configuration for Markdown files in package directories and the docs directory and update the pre-commit hook to run separate linting tasks for package and non-package files.

Assisted-by: Calude-Opus-4-6

type: pre_commit_static_analysis_report
description: Results of running static analysis checks when committing changes. report:

• task: lint_filenames status: passed
• task: lint_editorconfig status: passed
• task: lint_markdown status: na
• task: lint_package_json status: na
• task: lint_repl_help status: na
• task: lint_javascript_src status: passed
• task: lint_javascript_cli status: na
• task: lint_javascript_examples status: na
• task: lint_javascript_tests status: na
• task: lint_javascript_benchmarks status: na
• task: lint_python status: na
• task: lint_r status: na
• task: lint_c_src status: na
• task: lint_c_examples status: na
• task: lint_c_benchmarks status: na
• task: lint_c_tests_fixtures status: na
• task: lint_shell status: missing_dependencies
• task: lint_typescript_declarations status: passed
• task: lint_typescript_tests status: na
• task: lint_license_headers status: passed ---

Resolves #11121

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

This PR adds separate remark lint configurations for package READMEs, /docs Markdown files, and general Markdown files. Previously, all Markdown files were linted with the same remark config, which meant rules specific to package READMEs (like remark-lint-expected-html-sections and remark-lint-html-section-structure) were applied to files where they don't belong (e.g., files in /docs).

Remark configurations:

• .remarkrc.js — default config for general Markdown files (no HTML section rules)
• .remarkrc.pkg-readmes.js — package READMEs (includes HTML section rules)
• .remarkrc.docs.js — documentation files (no HTML section rules, separate for future customization)

New Make targets:

Linting:

• make lint-markdown-package-readmes — lint all package READMEs
• make lint-markdown-package-readme-files FILES='...' — lint a specified list of package READMEs
• make lint-markdown-docs — lint all documentation Markdown files
• make lint-markdown-docs-files FILES='...' — lint a specified list of documentation files
• make lint-markdown / make lint-markdown-files — lint general Markdown (unchanged targets, now uses default config)

Listing:

• make list-markdown-pkg-readmes — list all package README files (now defined in ls/markdown/pkg_readmes.mk
• make list-markdown-docs — list all documentation Markdown files (now defined in ls/markdown/docs.mk

All targets support filter patterns, e.g.:

make lint-markdown-package-readmes MARKDOWN_PKG_READMES_FILTER=".*/math/base/special/abs/.*"
make list-markdown-docs MARKDOWN_DOCS_FILTER=".*/contributing/.*"

Pre-commit hook now splits changed Markdown files into three categories and lints each with the appropriate config.

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

This pull request has the following related issues:

• [RFC]: Apply a subset of remark rules/plugins to files in /docs #11121 etc/remark/.remarkrc.js

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

I realize it's a bit weird that we're loading the plugins list for docs for the general remarkrc. We don't need to do the HTML section linting for non-package-README files, though. The reason for having three targets is because we might want to do separate processing for /docs files in the future. Currently it's the same config as "everything else".

https://github.com/stdlib-js/stdlib/pull/11139/changes#diff-e7ff32f40f118b3274e48d9933d7c636c4d7cb9788b6d6dcf25a370631567b91

Other

Any other information relevant to this pull request? This may include screenshots, references, and/or implementation notes.

No.

Checklist

Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.

• Read, understood, and followed the contributing guidelines.

AI Assistance

When authoring the changes proposed in this PR, did you use any kind of AI assistance?

• Yes
• No

If you answered "yes" above, how did you use AI assistance?

• Code generation (e.g., when writing an implementation or fixing a bug)
• Test/benchmark generation
• Documentation (including examples)
• Research and understanding

Disclosure

If you answered "yes" to using AI assistance, please provide a short disclosure indicating how you used AI assistance. This helps reviewers determine how much scrutiny to apply when reviewing your contribution. Example disclosures: "This PR was written primarily by Claude Code." or "I consulted ChatGPT to understand the codebase, but the proposed changes were fully authored manually by myself.".

Used for understanding the current remark build and for generating new make setup (all of which I read and reviewed).

@stdlib-js/reviewers