Change default build tool to conda-build again

[mbargull]

Checklist

• Added a news entry

I'd like us to get the fixes from conda-build=24.1.2 in which also affect conda-build=3.28.4 which we are currently limited to due to conda-forge/conda-forge-repodata-patches-feedstock#657 / mamba-org/boa#392 .
If we change to conda-build by default, we can avoid the constraint needed for boa=0.16.0.
(We should also put out a boa=0.16.1 for feedstocks that have conda-mambabuild set explicitly, of course.)

[beckermr]

I am for this, but we need to put a pin somewhere to ensure the latest version is used. There were some bugs which is why re rolled this back last I checked.

[mbargull]

I am for this, but we need to put a pin somewhere to ensure the latest version is used.

I guess shove a conda-build>=24.1 into remote_ci_setup so that the user can override it when needed, right?

There were some bugs which is why re rolled this back last I checked.

#1805
Yep, there were some oddities with conda-build using legacy code paths such that it didn't play well with conda-libmamba-solver; we've added some changes to conda/conda-libmamba-solver in November to fix that.

[beckermr]

Yes I think so or we can have it as a constraint on our ci setup package.

[h-vetinari]

If we change to conda-build by default, we can avoid the constraint needed for boa=0.16.0.

Not against this change, but just wanted to note that we could also (try to) backport the fix for mamba-org/boa#392 to unblock that constraint.

[jakirkham]

Yes I think so or we can have it as a constraint on our ci setup package.

Are we guaranteed to get the latest conda-forge-ci-setup when installing?

If not, maybe adding it here is easiest (though no objections to doing both)

[beckermr]

Yeah let's add it here. Good idea!

[mbargull]

Conceptually, I think conda-forge-ci-setup would be a nicer place for it (yes, we'd need to then have conda-forge-ci-setup=4,>={version with lower bound on conda-build} in remote_ci_setup here then), but for now, I'd also guess it's fine to add it here (done in the latest commit) and would postpone conceptual discussion currently.

[beckermr]

I agree. What's nice here is that people can override easily.

[jakirkham]

Thanks all! 🙏

Should we make a new release ( #1845 )?

[mbargull]

Thanks for the reviews!

[h-vetinari]

Should we make a new release ( #1845 )?

Give me a short time to make a minimal PR for #1840 please (just adding the comprehension for stdlib jinjas), so that - ideally - we won't have to release separately for that.