fix(eslint-plugin): [explicit-member-accessibility] report TSAbstractPropertyDefinition and TSAbstractMethodDefinition properly

[rafaelss95]

Fixes #3835.

[typescript-eslint]

Thanks for the PR, @rafaelss95!

typescript-eslint is a 100% community driven project, and we are incredibly grateful that you are contributing to that community.

The core maintainers work on this in their personal time, so please understand that it may not be possible for them to review your work immediately.

Thanks again!

---

🙏 Please, if you or your company is finding typescript-eslint valuable, help us sustain the project by sponsoring it transparently on https://opencollective.com/typescript-eslint. As a thank you, your profile/company logo will be added to our main README which receives thousands of unique visitors per day.

[nx-cloud]

Nx Cloud Report

CI ran the following commands for commit 7a5f897. Click to see the status, the terminal output, and the build insights.

📂 See all runs for this branch

Status	Command
	nx test @typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin-tslint
	nx test @typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin
	nx test @typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin-tslint
	nx test @typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin
	nx test @typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin-internal
	nx test @typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin-tslint
	nx test @typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin
	nx test @typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin-tslint
	nx test @typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin
	nx run-many --target=typecheck --all --parallel
	nx test @typescript-eslint/parser
	nx test @typescript-eslint/experimental-utils
	nx test @typescript-eslint/scope-manager
	nx test @typescript-eslint/visitor-keys
	nx test @typescript-eslint/typescript-estree
	nx test @typescript-eslint/parser
	nx test @typescript-eslint/experimental-utils
	nx run-many --target=build --all --parallel
	nx test @typescript-eslint/scope-manager
	nx test @typescript-eslint/visitor-keys

---

Sent with 💌 from NxCloud.

[bradzacher]

Thanks for fixing this so fast!
Your change here LGTM.

But there's one thing that's worth mentioning.
Previously the rule completely ignored abstract members. However now it will check them. This will likely cause a lot of new reports on existing codebase.

So I'm going to mark this as a breaking change.
This is perfectly fine as we're already working on the next major - i've update the target branch of your change.
Could you please rebase on the v5 branch?

[bradzacher]

while we're here we should also handle abstract methods

Suggested change

	MethodDefinition: checkMethodAccessibilityModifier,
	'MethodDefinition, TSAbstractMethodDefinition': checkMethodAccessibilityModifier,

[rafaelss95]

I just did the updates. Let me know if I miss something.

[bradzacher]

LGTM - thanks for this!