[build] Pending enhancements to development infrastructure

[egparedes]

Track possible enhancements to the development infrastructure after the #1813 PR bringing new tools (e.g. uv, nox) is merged.

• Bump ruff to the newest version and tackle the format changes it brings
• Update license header to remove the current year from the copyright
• Add tests folder to pre-commit ruff hook
• Add more linting rules to ruff config. Pointers:
  • ruff config in gridtools/jace
  • Enforce new typing syntax: Union[X, Y] -> X | Y, List[X] -> list[X], etc.
• Rename requires_ marks to uses_ or with_ (e.g. requires_dace -> uses_dace or with_dace, requires_gpu -> uses_gpu or with_gpu)
• Rename package_pytestmarks to recursive_pytestmark
• Bump tach version and try to get rid of the circular dependency issue by creating finer grain modules
• Add versioning infrastructure relying on git tags as the source of truth for versions (e.g. versioningit)
  • WIP: build: migrate from bump-my-version to versioningit #1832
• Discuss use of .python-version file in the repo as main python version selector
• Add macos system to the daily CI action
• Evaluate dependencies-action GitHub action to avoid merging PRs depending on unmerged changes
• Review the Dockerfiles used in CI and clean them up to leverage uv when possible. Some pointers:
  • Consider using .python-version file also in creation of the container image
  • https://hynek.me/articles/docker-uv/
  • https://pythonspeed.com/articles/uv-python-production/
• Fix doc generation settings and add CI action to test it
• Rediscuss the strategy to use for tests with optional dependencies like dace
  • use only importorskip()
  • use only custom marks
  • use both combined
  • other options
• Rediscuss use of fail-fast: false on matrix tests. Pointers:
  • https://www.edwardthomson.com/blog/github_actions_6_fail_fast_matrix_workflows

[romanc]

@egparedes in PR #1894 (comment) the question came up if we could enforce consistent usage of either Union[X, Y] or X | Y with ruff (same for list[T] vs List[T] and friends). This wasn't an option before dropping 3.8 and 3.9 support. I half-way remember that ruff has this feature to auto-upgrade code and do such code transformations, but I don't seem to find it anymore.

In any case, would it be okay to add that discussion to the list here? Or does it warrant a separate issue?

[egparedes]

@romanc Yes, I agree, we should upgrade the codebase to drop the old type syntax, since it's not longer needed. I just added a new point to the topic of adding more strict checks to the ruff configuration.