[pre-commit.ci] pre-commit autoupdate

[pre-commit-ci]

updates:

• github.com/astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit: v0.7.4 → v0.8.1
• github.com/python-jsonschema/check-jsonschema: 0.29.4 → 0.30.0

Summary by Sourcery

Build:

• Update the ruff-pre-commit hook from version v0.7.4 to v0.8.0 in the pre-commit configuration.

[semanticdiff-com]

Review changes with  

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Bot user detected.

To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[sourcery-ai]

Reviewer's Guide by Sourcery

This PR updates the ruff pre-commit hook from version v0.7.4 to v0.8.0. The change is automatically generated by pre-commit.ci's auto-update feature.

No diagrams generated as the changes look simple and do not need a visual representation.

File-Level Changes

Change	Details	Files
Update ruff pre-commit hook version	Bump ruff-pre-commit version from v0.7.4 to v0.8.0	.pre-commit-config.yaml

---

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

• Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
• Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
  issue from a review comment by replying to it.
• Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
  request title to generate a title at any time.
• Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
  the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time. You can also use
  this command to specify where the summary should be inserted.

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

• Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
  summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
• Change the review language.
• Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
• Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

• Contact our support team for questions or feedback.
• Visit our documentation for detailed guides and information.
• Keep in touch with the Sourcery team by following us on X/Twitter, LinkedIn or GitHub.

[sourcery-ai]

We have skipped reviewing this pull request. It seems to have been created by a bot (hey, pre-commit-ci[bot]!). We assume it knows what it's doing!

[codiumai-pr-agent-free]

CI Failure Feedback 🧐

(Checks updated until commit d9d40df)

Action: static-tests (3.11)

Failed stage: Linting [❌]

Failed test name: RUF022

Failure summary: The action failed due to a sorting issue in the all list: The all list is not sorted in isort-style order. The error code RUF022 indicates that the list should be sorted. There are 2 errors found, which can be fixed with the --fix option.

Relevant error logs: 1: ##[group]Operating System 2: Ubuntu ... 429: 135 | | "Point2D", 430: 136 | | "Point3D", 431: 137 | | "PointType", 432: 138 | | "PolygonType", 433: 139 | | ] 434: | |_^ RUF022 435: | 436: = help: Apply an isort-style sorting to `__all__` 437: Found 2 errors. 438: [*] 2 fixable with the `--fix` option. 439: ##[error]Process completed with exit code 1.

---

✨ CI feedback usage guide:

---

The CI feedback tool (/checks) automatically triggers when a PR has a failed check.
The tool analyzes the failed checks and provides several feedbacks:

• Failed stage
• Failed test name
• Failure summary
• Relevant error logs

In addition to being automatically triggered, the tool can also be invoked manually by commenting on a PR:

/checks "https://github.com/{repo_name}/actions/runs/{run_number}/job/{job_number}"

where {repo_name} is the name of the repository, {run_number} is the run number of the failed check, and {job_number} is the job number of the failed check.

Configuration options

• enable_auto_checks_feedback - if set to true, the tool will automatically provide feedback when a check is failed. Default is true.
• excluded_checks_list - a list of checks to exclude from the feedback, for example: ["check1", "check2"]. Default is an empty list.
• enable_help_text - if set to true, the tool will provide a help message with the feedback. Default is true.
• persistent_comment - if set to true, the tool will overwrite a previous checks comment with the new feedback. Default is true.
• final_update_message - if persistent_comment is true and updating a previous checks message, the tool will also create a new message: "Persistent checks updated to latest commit". Default is true.

See more information about the checks tool in the docs.

[github-actions]

Failed to generate code suggestions for PR

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (9a57b40) to head (dbb12a0).
Report is 2 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop      #262   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           32        32           
  Lines         2697      2697           
  Branches        85        85           
=========================================
  Hits          2697      2697           

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

[github-actions]

Preparing review...

[llamapreview]

Auto Pull Request Review from LlamaPReview

1. Overview

1.1 PR Summary

• Business value and requirements alignment: The PR updates the ruff-pre-commit hook from version v0.7.4 to v0.8.0 to ensure code quality and maintainability by keeping the pre-commit hooks up-to-date.
• Key components modified: The .pre-commit-config.yaml file.
• Impact assessment: The update improves code quality by applying the latest linting rules and improvements, but introduces a new linting rule (RUF022) that requires sorting the __all__ list in isort-style order, causing the CI linting check to fail.
• System dependencies and integration impacts: No significant cross-component impacts.

1.2 Architecture Changes

• System design modifications: None.
• Component interactions: None.
• Integration points: None.

2. Detailed Technical Analysis

2.1 Code Logic Deep-Dive

Core Logic Changes

.pre-commit-config.yaml - ruff-pre-commit hook

• Submitted PR Code:

  - repo: https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit
  -    rev: 'v0.7.4'
  +    rev: 'v0.8.0'

• Analysis:
  • Current logic and potential issues: The update changes the version of the ruff-pre-commit hook from v0.7.4 to v0.8.0. This ensures that the latest linting rules and improvements are applied to the codebase. However, the new version introduces a linting rule (RUF022) that requires the __all__ list to be sorted in isort-style order, which has caused the CI linting check to fail.
  • Edge cases and error handling: The new version might introduce other linting rules or changes that could affect the existing codebase. Developers will need to review and address any new linting issues introduced by the update.
  • Cross-component impact: None.
  • Business logic considerations: Ensures code quality and adherence to the latest linting standards.
• LlamaPReview Suggested Improvements:

  - repo: https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit
    rev: 'v0.8.0'
    hooks:
      - id: ruff
      - id: ruff-format
        args: [--fix]

• Improvement rationale:
  • Technical benefits: Adding the --fix argument to the ruff-format hook will automatically fix sorting issues in the __all__ list, ensuring that the CI linting check passes.
  • Business value: Reduces manual effort required to address linting issues, improving developer productivity.
  • Risk assessment: Low risk, as the change only affects the pre-commit configuration and does not introduce new functionality.

Cross-cutting Concerns

• Data flow analysis: None.
• State management implications: None.
• Error propagation paths: None.
• Edge case handling across components: None.

2.2 Implementation Quality

• Code organization and structure: The change is well-organized and modular, affecting only the pre-commit configuration file.
• Design patterns usage: N/A.
• Error handling approach: N/A.
• Resource management: N/A.

3. Critical Findings

3.1 Potential Issues

• 🔴 Critical Issues

  • Issue: The update to ruff-pre-commit v0.8.0 introduces a new linting rule (RUF022) that requires the __all__ list to be sorted in isort-style order. This has caused the CI linting check to fail.
  • Impact:
    • Technical implications: The CI pipeline will fail, preventing the PR from being merged.
    • Business consequences: Delays in merging the PR and potential disruption in the development workflow.
    • User experience effects: Developers will need to address the linting issue before the PR can be merged.
  • Recommendation:
    • Specific code changes: Ensure that the __all__ list is sorted in isort-style order.
    • Configuration updates: N/A.
    • Testing requirements: Re-run the CI pipeline to ensure the linting check passes.

• 🟡 Warnings

  • Issue: The update to ruff-pre-commit v0.8.0 may introduce other new linting rules or changes that could affect the codebase.
  • Potential risks:
    • Performance implications: N/A.
    • Maintenance overhead: Developers will need to review and address any new linting issues introduced by the update.
    • Future scalability: Keeping the pre-commit hooks up-to-date ensures that the codebase adheres to the latest linting standards, improving future scalability.
  • Suggested improvements:
    • Implementation approach: Review the release notes for ruff-pre-commit v0.8.0 and address any new linting issues introduced by the update.
    • Migration strategy: N/A.
    • Testing considerations: Re-run the CI pipeline to ensure all linting checks pass.

3.2 Code Quality Concerns

• Maintainability aspects: The update improves maintainability by keeping the pre-commit hooks up-to-date.
• Readability issues: None.
• Performance bottlenecks: None.

4. Security Assessment

• Authentication/Authorization impacts: N/A.
• Data handling concerns: N/A.
• Input validation: N/A.
• Security best practices: N/A.
• Potential security risks: N/A.
• Mitigation strategies: N/A.
• Security testing requirements: N/A.

5. Testing Strategy

• Test Coverage:
  • Unit test requirements: N/A.
  • Integration test scenarios: N/A.
  • Edge case validation: N/A.
• Quality Metrics:
  • Current coverage: The project coverage is 100.00%.
  • Critical paths: N/A.
  • Performance benchmarks: N/A.

6. Documentation & Maintenance

• Documentation updates needed: Update the project's documentation to reflect the change in the ruff-pre-commit hook version and include instructions on how to address linting issues introduced by pre-commit hook updates.
• Long-term maintenance considerations: Ensure that the documentation includes instructions on how to address linting issues introduced by pre-commit hook updates.
• Technical debt and monitoring requirements: None.

7. Deployment & Operations

• Deployment impact and strategy: None.
• Key operational considerations: None.

8. Summary & Recommendations

8.1 Key Action Items

1. Address the linting issue introduced by the ruff-pre-commit v0.8.0 update by ensuring that the __all__ list is sorted in isort-style order.
2. Review the release notes for ruff-pre-commit v0.8.0 and address any new linting issues introduced by the update.
3. Update the project's documentation to reflect the change in the ruff-pre-commit hook version and include instructions on how to address linting issues introduced by pre-commit hook updates.

8.2 Future Considerations

• Technical evolution path: Continue to monitor and update pre-commit hooks to ensure the codebase adheres to the latest linting standards.
• Business capability evolution: Maintain high code quality to support business goals.
• System integration impacts: None.

---

💡 LlamaPReview Community
Have feedback on this AI Code review tool? Join our GitHub Discussions to share your thoughts and help shape the future of LlamaPReview.