[PR] style(skills): apply ruff format and wire skills/ into workspace checks [magpie]

["Arnxvvv (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>]

Arnxvvv opened a new pull request, #1077:
URL: https://github.com/apache/magpie/pull/1077

   <!-- SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
        https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 -->
   
   ## Summary
   
   - **Adopts `skills/` as a workspace member** (`skills/pyproject.toml` added and declared in root `[tool.uv.workspace] members`), bringing helper scripts and guards under standard CI linting, type-checking, and testing.
   - **Applies `ruff format` across all Python code under `skills/`**, reflowing long set literals, regex constants, and multiline argument lists to comply with the 110-character line-length standard without altering runtime logic.
   - **Removes temporary skip**: deleted the `[tool.magpie.checks] skip = ["ruff-format"]` block so that `run-workspace-check.sh` and pre-commit hooks run the formatter check automatically across `skills/`.
   
   ## Type of change
   
   - [ ] Skill change (`.claude/skills/<name>/`) — eval fixtures updated below
   - [ ] Tool / bridge contract (`tools/<system>/*.md`)
   - [x] Python package (`tools/*/` with `pyproject.toml`)
   - [ ] Groovy reference impl
   - [ ] Cross-cutting (RFC, AGENTS.md, sandbox, privacy-LLM)
   - [ ] Documentation (`docs/`, `README.md`, `CONTRIBUTING.md`)
   - [ ] Project template (`projects/_template/`)
   - [x] CI / dev loop (`prek`, workflows, validators)
   - [ ] Other:
   
   ## Test plan
   
   - [x] For Python packages touched: `uv run pytest` / `ruff check` / `mypy` passes:
     - `uv run --directory skills --project . ruff format --check .` (9 files verified formatted)
     - `uv run --directory skills --project . ruff check .` (all lint rules passed clean)
     - `uv run --directory skills --project . python -m mypy .` (clean type-check across 9 source files)
     - `uv run --directory skills --project . python -m pytest` (9 passed in 0.14s)
   - [x] `uv lock --check` passes with `magpie-skills v0.1.0` member resolved.
   
   ## RFC-AI-0004 compliance
   
   - [ ] **HITL** — any new mutation is gated on explicit user confirmation
   - [ ] **Sandbox** — no new unrestricted host access; network reach declared in the adapter
   - [x] **Vendor neutrality** — placeholders (`<PROJECT>`, `<tracker>`, `<upstream>`, `<security-list>`) used in all skill / tool prose (the `check-placeholders` prek hook is the mechanical gate)
   - [ ] **Conversational + correctable** — agentic-override path documented if behaviour is adopter-tunable
   - [ ] **Write-access discipline** — no autonomous outbound messages; drafts only, sent on confirmation
   - [ ] **Privacy LLM** — private content does not reach a non-approved LLM; redactor invoked where needed
   
   ## Linked issues
   
   - Closes #1076
   - Follow-up to #1054
   
   ## Notes for reviewers (optional)
   
   - Includes the foundational infrastructure from PR #1054 (`skills/pyproject.toml`, workspace member registration, `uv.lock` update, and type annotations in `scan_ci_runners.py` / `collect_status.py`) along with the mechanical `ruff format` changes so the branch is completely self-contained and ready for immediate CI testing.
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@magpie.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org

Re: [PR] style(skills): apply ruff format and wire skills/ into workspace checks [magpie]

["potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>]

potiuk commented on PR #1077:
URL: https://github.com/apache/magpie/pull/1077#issuecomment-5321246857

   Correction — I got one thing wrong in my review here, and it was unfair to you.
   
   I said the Markdown hunks in `contributor-nomination/fetch.md`,
   `contributor-sentiment/SKILL.md` and `issue-reproducer/verification.md` were
   "hand edits presented as formatter output", on the reasoning that "`ruff format`
   does not touch `.md`". I reverted them on that basis.
   
   That reasoning was wrong. **Ruff 0.16 formats Python code blocks inside Markdown
   files**; 0.15.x — the version pinned in the repo at the time — did not. You were
   evidently running a newer ruff locally, so those hunks were genuine formatter
   output, exactly as your PR described. Nothing was misrepresented.
   
   I found this out while fixing the dependabot bump to ruff 0.16.2 (#1095): the
   formatter reproduced your three Markdown changes byte-for-byte, unprompted. That
   is about as direct a refutation of my claim as one could ask for.
   
   So: the revert was unnecessary, and #1095 puts those same changes back as a
   side effect of the version bump. My "the test plan didn't cover them" point was
   also wrong — `ruff format --check` did cover them, on your ruff.
   
   The rest of the review stands, and combining the two PRs was still the right
   call given both branches added the same `skills/pyproject.toml`. But the part
   that questioned your description of your own change does not stand, and I'm
   sorry for it — a first contribution is a bad place to be second-guessed on
   something the reviewer got wrong.
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@magpie.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org