deprecated askUser

[pelikhan]

• Added esbuild.meta.json and esbuild.treemap.html to .gitignore file, which indicates these files will be ignored in future git processes. :page_facing_up:
• There is an extensive update in THIRD_PARTY_LICENSES.md, particularly the details for the mathjs@ package. Possibly a dependency upgrade or addition.📜
• The package genaiscript-vscode version 1.41.7 has been updated to 1.42.0, probably indicating some improvements or bug fixes. :arrow_up:
• Updated caniuse-lite@1.0.30001638 to caniuse-lite@1.0.30001639 suggesting minor changes or fixes. :wrench:
• Deleted the file ask-user.md from the docs directory. :wastebasket:
• Created a new file called esbuild.network.html in the packages/cli directory. :new:
• Lots of changes in the AskScript and related packages that are not directly user facing, possibly performance improvements, internal enhancements or bug fixes. :gear:
• Upgraded the version of various packages from 1.41.7 to 1.42.0; seems like a regular version upgrade. :chart_with_upwards_trend:
• Some changes in the npm packages may show some dependency updates or possible improvements in the product. :package:

generated by pr-describe

[github-actions[bot]]

The pull request involves removing the functionality related to askUser which includes both the interface AskUserOptions and the function askUser. The changes seem to have been propagated correctly through all necessary files.

However, it would be important to ensure that there are no other dependencies in the codebase that rely on the askUser function. If other parts of the application rely on this user prompt and it has been removed, there could be unexpected behaviors or errors.

Without context on why this change is being made or what the behavior of the application is expected to be after this change, it's difficult to definitively say whether this change is good or not.

Nonetheless, from a purely code perspective, the changes are consistent, and there doesn't seem to be any lingering references to the removed code. So based on the available information, it's LGTM :rocket: assuming the impacts on application functionality have been properly considered and addressed elsewhere.

generated by pr-review