Upgrade ruff to 0.16.5 and address new rules - #459
Conversation
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
ruff 0.16 stabilized this rule. We do not want a copyright header on every source file. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
ruff 0.16 stabilized too-many-positional-arguments. The existing PLR0913 suppressions do not cover it. Making these arguments keyword-only would be a breaking change for callers that pass them positionally. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
ruff 0.16 formats Python fences in Markdown files by default. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Advanced Run ID: ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review. 📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe pull request updates Ruff ignore settings, extends constructor lint suppressions, and reformats a ChangesLint and documentation cleanup
Priority: ⬇️ Low Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to This updates Ruff-related lint handling and reformats documentation without changing application behavior or public APIs. No merge-blocking production risk is identified. 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. A rabbit reads each line, Comment |
Dependabot's ruff 0.16 bump fails CI because 0.16 stabilized new rules and started formatting Python fences in Markdown. This PR bumps ruff and addresses the failures.
uv.lock. The dependabot PR closes when this merges.CPY001(missing-copyright-notice). We do not want a copyright header on every file.PLR0917(too-many-positional-arguments) on the web-service client constructors and the minFraud models, where making the arguments keyword-only would break callers that pass them positionally. The existingPLR0913suppressions do not cover the new rule.Each change is its own commit.
STF-1328
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
Summary by CodeRabbit
Documentation
Chores