enable stricter ruff configuration

[danieleades]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 94.44444% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 97.95%. Comparing base (a731d2b) to head (02a8c9c).
⚠️ Report is 432 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
copier/user_data.py	75.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
devtasks.py	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
tests/test_config.py	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
tests/test_prompt.py	90.90%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1982      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   97.95%   97.95%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          53       53              
  Lines        5581     5575       -6     
==========================================
- Hits         5467     5461       -6     
  Misses        114      114              

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	97.95% <94.44%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[pawamoy]

Thanks so much @danieleades for opening a new PR this quick 🚀

LGTM.

I'm really not a fan of E501, especially with 80-characters width, which is quite short and triggers a lot of those, but let's not address this here 👍

[danieleades]

Thanks so much @danieleades for opening a new PR this quick 🚀

LGTM.

I'm really not a fan of E501, especially with 80-characters width, which is quite short and triggers a lot of those, but let's not address this here 👍

If you feel that way, it makes sense to increase that character limit before merging this PR since the lines will wrap differently. Do you have a specific width in mind?

[pawamoy]

I generally use 120. Let see what other maintainers think.

[sisp]

I have don't have a strong opinion on line length, but I tend to prefer sticking with (sane) defaults. Ruff defaults to 88. Do you feel it's a too low value?

[pawamoy]

With 4-space indents, I think it's too low, yes. There are many, many strings and snippets that get split or exploded on multiple lines because we're in a condition in a loop in a method in a class, and it feels like the code get squished. But I understand why people sometimes prefer sticking to 80/88, as it makes it easier to read code side by side in multiple panes. So, no strong opinion. If none of us has strong opinions, lets keep the current line length 🙂

[sisp]

@danieleades Looks great! Just some minor remarks from my side.

[sisp]

I think we should add an alias

# Backwards compatibility
CopierAnswersInterrupt = CopierAnswersInterruptError

to retain backwards compatibility, just in case somebody relies on catching this exception.

[pawamoy]

I agree, good catch @sisp.

[sisp]

I think we could avoid such rule exceptions:

Suggested change

	"{{ _copier_conf.answers_file }}.jinja": "{{ _copier_answers|to_nice_yaml }}", # noqa: E501
	"{{ _copier_conf.answers_file }}.jinja": (
	"{{ _copier_answers|to_nice_yaml }}"
	),

Several more cases like this below.