Add ruff auto fix

[litan1106]

Description

• added a standardized way to lint and auto-format code. (like the golang fmt auto formatted)

How to use it?

• execute tox -e ruff to auto-format code

Issue reference

• we discussed it in discord python-sdk channel

Checklist

Please make sure you've completed the relevant tasks for this PR, out of the following list:

• Code compiles correctly
• Created/updated tests
• Extended the documentation

[berndverst]

This PR breaks the type check.

Locally, please run tox -e type, tox -e flake8, and tox -e py311

[litan1106]

This PR breaks the type check.

Locally, please run tox -e type, tox -e flake8, and tox -e py311

All passed now. I just turned off the ruff auto format on these two lines.

[elena-kolevska]

Thanks for the PR @litan1106. I had been thinking about adding a auto fixer for a while too.
One question - what's the reason for having both flake and ruff?

[litan1106]

I think @berndverst wanted to keep flake8 for linting. Ruff can do both linting and auto format. I think it's okay to keep using flake8 since we don't want to change too many things in one PR.

[elena-kolevska]

I understand. Do they have different behaviour though? If we can configure ruff to use the same lint rules as flake8, keeping it simple with a single tool that does both things would be nice. One problem would be if we plan on using some of the flake plugins in the future... What do you think @berndverst?

Also, I think it would be best if we kept the PR to the configuration changes only. We can apply the new formatting in a separate PR later.

[berndverst]

@elena-kolevska flake8 is a much much more common linter for Python. That's why I don't want to switch to ruff for linting :)

[berndverst]

@litan1106 I force pushed to your PR - I split everything up into two commits.
1: Adding ruff configurations
2: Autoformatting everything using tox -e ruff
3: Adds a ruff check to CI

[berndverst]

We can consider adding ruff as the linter in the future by the way. For now let us keep flake8 :)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 137 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (593eb07) 86.21% compared to head (32aa1fe) 86.21%.

Files	Patch %	Lines
dapr/aio/clients/grpc/client.py	54.79%	33 Missing ⚠️
dapr/clients/grpc/client.py	84.00%	12 Missing ⚠️
dapr/clients/http/dapr_actor_http_client.py	42.85%	12 Missing ⚠️
ext/dapr-ext-fastapi/dapr/ext/fastapi/actor.py	50.00%	10 Missing ⚠️
ext/flask_dapr/flask_dapr/actor.py	42.85%	8 Missing ⚠️
dapr/clients/grpc/_request.py	45.45%	6 Missing ⚠️
dapr/actor/runtime/state_manager.py	75.00%	5 Missing ⚠️
dapr/conf/helpers.py	44.44%	5 Missing ⚠️
...orkflow/dapr/ext/workflow/dapr_workflow_context.py	66.66%	5 Missing ⚠️
...apr-ext-workflow/dapr/ext/workflow/retry_policy.py	37.50%	5 Missing ⚠️
... and 20 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #657   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   86.21%   86.21%           
=======================================
  Files          79       79           
  Lines        3998     3998           
=======================================
  Hits         3447     3447           
  Misses        551      551           

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