Align style checks with jwst

[braingram]

spacetelescope/jwst#9081 introduced major changes to the code style checks in jwst.

Since this package primarily serves jwst this PR updates the style checks here to more closely match those in jwst.

Regtests: https://github.com/spacetelescope/RegressionTests/actions/runs/13039378253
show 1 error test_exec_time_0_crs which I'm chalking up to a slower-than-usual runner which took 11 instead of 10 seconds. I expect these may need to be re-run after review so I'll open this PR for review now.
EDIT: see updated regtests comment: #383 (comment)

Branch protections will need to be updated after this PR is merged to check for pre-commit success.

Tasks

• update or add relevant tests
• update relevant docstrings and / or docs/ page
• Does this PR change any API used downstream? (if not, label with no-changelog-entry-needed)
  • write news fragment(s) in changes/: echo "changed something" > changes/<PR#>.<changetype>.rst (see below for change types)
  • run jwst regression tests with this branch installed ("git+https://github.com/<fork>/stdatamodels@<branch>")

news fragment change types...

• changes/<PR#>.feature.rst: new feature
• changes/<PR#>.bugfix.rst: fixes an issue
• changes/<PR#>.doc.rst: documentation change
• changes/<PR#>.removal.rst: deprecation or removal of public API
• changes/<PR#>.misc.rst: infrastructure or miscellaneous change

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 73.12253% with 204 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 78.17%. Comparing base (788f7bd) to head (0c91732).
Report is 12 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/stdatamodels/jwst/transforms/models.py	31.70%	84 Missing ⚠️
src/stdatamodels/jwst/datamodels/wcs_ref_models.py	27.08%	35 Missing ⚠️
...tamodels/jwst/transforms/converters/jwst_models.py	67.27%	18 Missing ⚠️
src/stdatamodels/fits_support.py	87.35%	11 Missing ⚠️
src/stdatamodels/model_base.py	87.67%	9 Missing ⚠️
src/stdatamodels/schema.py	85.41%	7 Missing ⚠️
src/stdatamodels/validate.py	50.00%	7 Missing ⚠️
src/stdatamodels/jwst/datamodels/asn.py	37.50%	5 Missing ⚠️
src/stdatamodels/jwst/datamodels/util.py	77.27%	5 Missing ⚠️
src/stdatamodels/properties.py	89.79%	5 Missing ⚠️
... and 9 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #383       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   67.59%   78.17%   +10.57%     
===========================================
  Files         115      115               
  Lines        5932     5145      -787     
===========================================
+ Hits         4010     4022       +12     
+ Misses       1922     1123      -799     

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

[emolter]

Thanks very much for putting this together, Brett!

The changes to the CI and pre-commit look good to me. I had some suggestions for following up on this PR, but none of them would have to be handled now.

Most of my comments are related to places where I think it wouldn't be overly disruptive to fix the errors instead of noqa: ignore.

[emolter]

I'm happy with this pending passing downstream JWST unit tests. Probably wouldn't hurt to re-run the regression tests too out of an abundance of caution, since you accepted at least one of the "unsafe" fixes I suggested.

[braingram]

Rerunning regtests here: https://github.com/spacetelescope/RegressionTests/actions/runs/13039378253

[braingram]

Rerunning regtests here: https://github.com/spacetelescope/RegressionTests/actions/runs/13039378253

Regtests show only unrelated errors.

[emolter]

Code changes look good to me now, or at least, we have separate issues tracking additional changes.

Why is the Python 3.10 test failing now? I don't see how it was modified by the changes here.

[braingram]

The 3.10 test failure:
https://github.com/spacetelescope/stdatamodels/actions/runs/13115248313/job/36587914704?pr=383#step:10:282
is one incarnation of the "random" one where depending on the test order (and how CRDS files are downloaded) tests can fail when >1 test downloads the same CRDS file.