Add custom configs

[turnerm]

More custom configs. A couple of issues to note:

• I had to separate black and ruff configurations, because the formats of the files need to be different unfortunately
• I cannot for the life of me figure out if there is a way to use a custom path to hatch.toml. There is a --config option for hatch but it's more for the general configuration file config.toml. I can keep searching / experimenting, as this would really pare down pyrpoject.toml

[github-actions]

Test Results

0 tests   - 95   0 ✔️  - 95   0s ⏱️ - 2m 30s
0 suites  -   1   0 💤 ±  0 
0 files    -   1   0 ❌ ±  0 

Results for commit eb7ab99. ± Comparison against base commit 66e9930.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[mcarans]

Thanks for your work on this.

I have made an issue for Hatch about using a .config folder: pypa/hatch#867. The author responded "Top-level --config https://hatch.pypa.io/latest/cli/reference/" which sounds like you've tried. if --config does not work as you'd expect, please can you reply to the issue say why it is unsuitable or let me know so I can.

In ruff documentation it says "As an alternative to pyproject.toml, Ruff will also respect a ruff.toml (or .ruff.toml) file, which implements an equivalent schema (though the [tool.ruff] hierarchy can be omitted)." (https://beta.ruff.rs/docs/configuration/#using-rufftoml)

It says can be omitted. Did you find that the [tool.ruff] hierarchy must be omitted? If so, please can you create an issue on the ruff project to get this clarified.

I think the # build section that has [tool.hatch.build. can be moved to just below

#########################
# Project Configuration #
#########################

This is so that the Hatch stuff is consecutive in the pyproject.toml file. What do you think?

[turnerm]

Thanks for looking into all of that Mike.

I have made an issue for Hatch about using a .config folder: pypa/hatch#867. The author responded "Top-level --config https://hatch.pypa.io/latest/cli/reference/" which sounds like you've tried. if --config does not work as you'd expect, please can you reply to the issue say why it is unsuitable or let me know so I can.

Ah great to open a discussion. I think the confusion comes from the fact that --config is for a general Hatch configuration, as mentioned here.

In the local section it says: "By default, Hatch will look for a pyproject.toml file in the current working directory and any parent directories. The directory storing the first found file will be considered the project root.". This makes me think that the project configuration must be in the project root - I will mention this in the discussion.

In ruff documentation it says "As an alternative to pyproject.toml, Ruff will also respect a ruff.toml (or .ruff.toml) file, which implements an equivalent schema (though the [tool.ruff] hierarchy can be omitted)." (https://beta.ruff.rs/docs/configuration/#using-rufftoml)

It says can be omitted. Did you find that the [tool.ruff] hierarchy must be omitted? If so, please can you create an issue on the ruff project to get this clarified.

Ah nice find, indeed I confirmed that with ruff.toml the headings do not work, I've opened this issue

This is so that the Hatch stuff is consecutive in the pyproject.toml file. What do you think?

Good idea, I've reorganized pyproject.toml a bit, let me know what you think.

[mcarans]

I like the reorganised pyproject.toml!

What happens if you include the lines below in ruff.toml - does ruff complain about unknown configuration? If you point Black at it, does Black complain about the ruff config?

[tool.black]
line-length = 79

Hopefully soon, Black won't be needed as its functionality will be in ruff.

[turnerm]

If I try to add the black parameters to ruff.toml as you suggested, ruff complains:

error: Failed to parse `/home/turnerm/sync/hdx-python-utilities/.config/ruff.toml`: TOML parse error at line 16, column 2
   |
16 | [tool.black]
   |  ^^^^
unknown field `tool`, expected one of `allowed-confusables`, `builtins`, `cache-dir`, `dummy-variable-rgx`, `exclude`, `extend`, `extend-exclude`, `extend-ignore`, `extend-select`, `external`, `fix`, `fix-only`, `fixable`, `format`, `force-exclude`, `ignore`, `ignore-init-module-imports`, `line-length`, `required-version`, `respect-gitignore`, `select`, `show-source`, `show-fixes`, `src`, `namespace-packages`, `target-version`, `task-tags`, `typing-modules`, `unfixable`, `update-check`, `flake8-annotations`, `flake8-bandit`, `flake8-bugbear`, `flake8-builtins`, `flake8-comprehensions`, `flake8-errmsg`, `flake8-quotes`, `flake8-self`, `flake8-tidy-imports`, `flake8-type-checking`, `flake8-gettext`, `flake8-implicit-str-concat`, `flake8-import-conventions`, `flake8-pytest-style`, `flake8-unused-arguments`, `isort`, `mccabe`, `pep8-naming`, `pycodestyle`, `pydocstyle`, `pylint`, `pyupgrade`, `per-file-ignores`

but black does not seem to mind.

[mcarans]

Thanks for checking. These changes all look fine to me.