implement --no-dedupe for uv pip tree

[ChannyClaus]

Summary

Resolves #4439 partially.

Implements for uv pip tree:

• --no-dedupe flag, similar to cargo tree --no-dedupe .
• denote dependency cycles with (#) and add a footnote if there's a cycle (using (*) would require keeping track of the cycle state, so opted to do this instead).

Test Plan

The existing tests pass + added a couple of tests to validate --no-dedupe behavior.

[zanieb]

I'm confused, why do we need a separate character for cycles?

[ChannyClaus]

I'm confused, why do we need a separate character for cycles?

if there's a cycle and --no-dedupe flag isn't given, wouldn't it potentially use (*) for two different things? never mind, just realized this is the current behavior. my intention was to disambiguate these two to make it clearer but maybe it isn't a big deal.

the behavior can be minorly confusing for cyclic dependencies though, probably (note the different error messages for the same set of installed distributions depending on the presence of --no-dedupe):

chankang@chans-Air ~/repos/uv -  (pip-tree-no-dedupe)
$ cargo run -q pip tree --no-dedupe
uv-cyclic-dependencies-c v0.1.0
└── uv-cyclic-dependencies-a v0.1.0
    └── uv-cyclic-dependencies-b v0.1.0
        └── uv-cyclic-dependencies-a v0.1.0 (*)
(*) Dependency cycle
chankang@chans-Air ~/repos/uv -  (pip-tree-no-dedupe)
$ cargo run -q pip tree
uv-cyclic-dependencies-c v0.1.0
└── uv-cyclic-dependencies-a v0.1.0
    └── uv-cyclic-dependencies-b v0.1.0
        └── uv-cyclic-dependencies-a v0.1.0 (*)
(*) Package tree already displayed

[zanieb]

That seems fine, I'd just say "Package tree is a cycle and cannot be shown" instead

[zanieb]

Nice!