[Backport release-25.11] jetbrains: pycharm/idea unified builds; deprecate writerside & aqua

[theCapypara]

Backport for #466331

The automatic backport just failed due to some changes in the maintainer lists not being backported; I backported the maintainer lists from 25.11 in a seperate commit.

[github-actions]

This report is automatically generated by the PR / Check / cherry-pick CI workflow.

Some of the commits in this PR require the author's and reviewer's attention.

If you need to merge this PR despite the warnings, please dismiss this review shortly before merging.

Important

e7c64cc is not a cherry-pick, because: Too many changes to maintainer list that can't be easily cherry picked.. Please review this commit manually.

Hint: The full diffs are also available in the runner logs with slightly better highlighting.

[MattSturgeon]

I just used the maintainer lists from 25.11 on the new entries for this PR.

I'd prefer to consider "syncing maintainers with master" to be a separate logical unit, so a separate commit. This way the actual backport commit will be an exact cherry-pick.

[theCapypara]

Sure, how about this?

Edit: Actually I'm not sure what I did now is allowed?

Ensure the commits exist on the master branch. In the case of squashed or rebased merges, the commit hash will change and the new commits can be found in the merge message at the bottom of the master pull request.

https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#manually-backporting-changes

I guess I would need to also chery-pick these commits properly, but I can't, there are too many conflicts:

• 3cffb9c
• 8a64ca6
• c0ec79b

I added the Not-cherry-picked-because: <reason> footer to the first commit now, I hope that's correct? Sorry I've never done this...

[MattSturgeon]

Perfect, thanks.

Yeah, the point of the bot's review is to:

1. Lint any issues with cherry-picks, i.e. missing the commit hash reference.
2. Highlight any difference with the commit being cherry-picked, to aid manual review.
3. Highlight any commits that aren't cherry-picked, so that they aren't glossed over in review.

This means reviewers can have confidence in commits the bot doesn't highlight, because they are clean cherry-picks of something already merged into master.

The things the bot does highlight aren't necessarily problems; they're just things that need manual review.

Looks good