fix(lint): apply ruff auto-fixes and formatting to Python source files

[camr]

Summary

• Applied ruff check --fix to auto-fix F401, F841, F541, E401 violations across all Python source files
• Applied ruff format for quote normalization, trailing commas, and line-length wrapping
• Manually fixed remaining F841: removed unused as f binding from with open("/.within_container", "r") in server.py
• Skipped server.js (no eslint config present in repo)

Remaining lint errors (intentional, not fixed)

• 7x E402 in server.py: imports after bootstrap setup code — these run after bootstrap.py initialization and cannot be hoisted without breaking startup semantics

Test plan

• Verify ruff check server.py bootstrap.py tests/ shows only the 7 pre-existing E402 errors
• Confirm no F841 warnings remain
• Run existing test suite to confirm no semantic changes were introduced

Nightshift-Task: lint-fix
Nightshift-Ref: https://github.com/marcus/nightshift

---

Automated by nightshift

[nesquena-hermes]

Thanks @camr — appreciate the lint sweep, but this isn't going to merge in its current shape. A few things to lay out:

What this PR is. ~18.5K added / ~10K removed across 100 files, generated by an automated nightshift run (Automated by [nightshift](https://github.com/marcus/nightshift)) running ruff check --fix + ruff format. The vast majority of the diff is whitespace/quote/line-length normalization, not actual fixes.

Why this can't ship as-is.

1. Project lint policy is opt-in line-by-line. This repo doesn't have a pyproject.toml ruff config, doesn't run ruff in CI, and has no historical commitment to ruff-format style. Applying it across 100 files freezes the project into one tool's opinion about quote normalization, trailing commas, and line wrapping.

2. The diff is impossible to review. Reviewing 100-file mass-format changes for genuine correctness requires reading every file twice. The signal-to-noise ratio for finding regressions is roughly zero.

3. No CI verification. GitHub shows zero status checks on this PR. We'd be merging 28K LOC of mechanical edits trusting only ruff's auto-fix safety.

4. The F841 "unused as f" change in server.py is a real edit but should be its own ~5 LOC PR with a behavioral test, not buried in a mass format.

What we'd take.

If you want to land lint cleanups here, the right shape is:

• One PR per concern. F401 unused imports (alone). F841 unused bindings (alone). E401 multi-import lines (alone). Each ≤30 files, each independently reviewable.
• No ruff format. We're not adopting ruff-format-style globally without a separate decision conversation. If you want to propose adoption, open an issue first with the rationale.
• Show CI green. Run pytest locally and confirm no behavior changes.

I'm tagging this maintainer-review to make the "we may not merge this even after work" state explicit. Closing isn't right because the F841/F401 cleanups are individually valuable — just not as a 100-file mass.

If splitting feels like too much work for what was a one-shot nightshift run, no problem — feel free to close, or I can take the F841 fix on server.py as a separate followup with co-authorship credit.

[nesquena-hermes]

Hi @camr — closing this PR for the reasons @nesquena-hermes laid out in the May 10 comment. To summarize the decision:

• Scope mismatch. ~18.5K added / ~10K removed across 100+ files in a single PR is incompatible with our review workflow. Even at favourable change-density, that's beyond the budget of a single reviewer pass.
• Generated-only changes need human-readable rationale. A bulk ruff format run without per-rule justification or before/after readability evidence reads as "tool said so" rather than a deliberate codebase decision. We'd rather adopt ruff format as a CI gate first (one decision to review) and let formatting changes flow naturally afterward.
• Conflicts churn. Mass-rewriting Python sources collides with every in-flight PR. The cost is paid by every contributor, not just by us merging this one.

If you'd like to land ruff formatting incrementally, the path that works:

1. Open a small PR adding ruff format to pre-commit + CI as a check (no source changes yet) — easy to review, easy to revert.
2. After that lands, format-only PRs per top-level package (~5–10 files each) labeled chore are mergeable in a normal week.

Appreciate the effort and the careful per-rule curation that's clearly in here somewhere. Closing this top-level PR; happy to review the incremental version whenever you're ready.