feat: add build number editing for v1 recipes

[wolfv]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 84.61538% with 12 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 76.26%. Comparing base (820dea3) to head (ebec146).
Report is 11 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...forge_tick/update_recipe/v1_recipe/build_number.py	78.43%	11 Missing ⚠️
conda_forge_tick/migrators/core.py	88.88%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3009      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   76.23%   76.26%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         115      118       +3     
  Lines       12559    12628      +69     
==========================================
+ Hits         9574     9631      +57     
- Misses       2985     2997      +12     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[wolfv]

Note: I added a fix to be able to pass a callable for new_build_number in #3011

IMO this could still be reviewed/merged separately and I could take care of managing the two PRs, as you prefer.

[beckermr]

I left a few comments. Also the module names of v1 and yaml are easy to stomp on. Let's

• rename the v1 module to something longer like v1_recipes or w/e.
• rename the yaml module to something else and possibly combine those routines into the ones in the utils module or the recipe parser module

[wolfv]

I made the changes:

• only touch build, build_number or number keys in context (and also only touches the first of them)
• merged changes from the other PR to allow callables for build number
• renamed to v1_recipe and got rid of the yaml module by re-using old code

Let me know if there is anything else

[wolfv]

@beckermr - the 'safe' loader doesn't seem to be able to preserve the quotes - which one do we care about more?

[wolfv]

Switched (back) to rt.

[wolfv]

The initial idea behind ruamel.yaml was its RoundTripConstructor , which is also a subclass of the SafeConstructor. You used to get this using the now deprecated round_trip_load function and nowadays via the .load() method after using YAML(typ='rt'), this is also the default for a YAML() instance without typ argument. That RoundTripConstructor does not registers any tags or have any code that interprets tags above and beyond the normal tags that the SafeConstructor uses.

https://stackoverflow.com/a/71299116