Add developer overview

[hmpf]

.. and fix problem with pre-commit! Excludes doesn't work as we thought.

At least for black, black's own config isn't used at all. It is pre-commit that selects which of the already indexed files to check and that is controlled with the "exclude", "language" and "types" arguments. "exclude" is a regular expression.

See https://stackoverflow.com/questions/61032281/exclude-some-files-on-running-black-using-pre-commit

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 84.20%. Comparing base (d114b38) to head (e24ca28).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #385   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   84.20%   84.20%           
=======================================
  Files          89       89           
  Lines        4040     4040           
=======================================
  Hits         3402     3402           
  Misses        638      638           

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[lunkwill42]

.. and fix problem with pre-commit! Excludes doesn't work as we thought.

At least for black, black's own config isn't used at all. It is pre-commit that selects which of the already indexed files to check and that is controlled with the "exclude", "language" and "types" arguments. "exclude" is a regular expression.

See https://stackoverflow.com/questions/61032281/exclude-some-files-on-running-black-using-pre-commit

Actually, as explained in the link you posted, it's not that Black's config isn't being used: Black still reads its config from pyproject.toml in our case. However, Blacks exclude-option is only used to exclude files when Black is discovering the file tree itself. If a filename is explicitly put as an argument to the black command line (which seems to be what the pre-commit framework is doing), Black's exclude option doesn't apply at all.

[hmpf]

This is a good birds-eye view - but it does comes dangerously close to being just a glossary of terms. Could Sphinx' glossary functionality be leveraged in some way here, perhaps?

I'll play around a bit. Not sure if one can have more than one glossary, if ever we need another figure like this in the same docs.

[hmpf]

Hm, Sphinx glossary is not hierarchical, so there would be no good way to both discuss sources and types of sources without a major rewrite.

[sonarqubecloud[bot]]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
No data about Duplication

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[github-actions[bot]]

Test results

       5 files         1 errors  328 suites   11m 41s :stopwatch:    462 tests    461 :heavy_check_mark: 1 :zzz: 0 :x: 1 848 runs  1 844 :heavy_check_mark: 4 :zzz: 0 :x:

For more details on these parsing errors, see this check.

Results for commit 6469b1ad.

[sonarqubecloud[bot]]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud