fix: pre-commit hook

[cbachhuber]

Relevant issues

With proselint integrated into my pre-commit config like

  - repo: https://github.com/amperser/proselint
    rev: v0.16.0
    hooks:
      - id: proselint

I get

$ pre-commit run --all-files proselint
A linter for prose.......................................................Failed
- hook id: proselint
- exit code: 2

usage: proselint [options] <command>
proselint: error: argument : invalid choice: '.pyproject.toml' (choose from 'version', 'check', 'dump-config')
usage: proselint [options] <command>
proselint: error: argument : invalid choice: 'src/README.md' (choose from 'version', 'check', 'dump-config')
usage: proselint [options] <command>
proselint: error: argument : invalid choice: 'CONTRIBUTING.md' (choose from 'version', 'check', 'dump-config')

Brief

Fix the offered pre-commit hook.

Changes

Since proselint expects a list of files after the check command, pass that command to it in the pre-commit-hooks.yaml config, such that users don't have to. This fixes my manual test, do we want a continuous test for this?

[cbachhuber]

Other repos such as https://github.com/crate-ci/typos/ document pre-commit integration, see https://github.com/crate-ci/typos/blob/master/docs/pre-commit.md. Should we do that in this repo as well?

[Nytelife26]

Thank you for the contribution! I may not have overlooked this in the release if it were documented, so it would be nice to add that to the Plugins section of the README. Speaking of which, you are right, automated testing of the vendored plugins in question would be useful.

Would you like to open PRs for those too?

[drainpixie]

Should the hook run on all text files? I fear this would return a lot of false-positives.

Naturally, right now proselint support for anything besides plain-text is "limited" (at least till docile progresses), but we could put some more standard file types till then, or document this caveat and let the user configure inputs themselves.

[Nytelife26]

Should the hook run on all text files? I fear this would return a lot of false-positives.

Thinking out loud here: if we had the machinery for rulesets (as in #1406), it could reduce friction for users to have different rulesets for non-plaintext files. I would be wary about this inconsistency constituting unexpected behaviour, so it might be better to turn off checks that cause issues for various file types by default.

we could put some more standard file types till then, or document this caveat and let the user configure inputs themselves.

We should narrow types to the permitted set defined in proselint.tools and files with no extension at least. I would also agree that proselint's limited support for non-plaintext files should be documented.

[cbachhuber]

Thanks, constrained file types in 4a47cff. I didn't include .rtf, as that's really unusual in git-based environments in my experience) and pre-commit's identify framework doesn't support this extension.

[cbachhuber]

@drainpixie @Nytelife26 these are the final changes in this PR, sorry for making your reviews stale: I updated the readme to demonstrate the pre-commit config. Is it ok to list this among the other installation options?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 92.56%. Comparing base (505e07c) to head (4473f7d).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1465   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   92.56%   92.56%           
=======================================
  Files         100      100           
  Lines        1022     1022           
=======================================
  Hits          946      946           
  Misses         76       76           

Flag	Coverage Δ
macos-latest	91.97% <ø> (ø)
py3.10	92.56% <ø> (ø)
py3.11	92.56% <ø> (ø)
py3.12	92.56% <ø> (ø)
py3.13	91.97% <ø> (ø)
py3.14	91.97% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu-latest	91.97% <ø> (ø)
windows-latest	92.56% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.