Some more progress towards recipe v1 minimigrators

[mgorny]

Description:

• enable Cos7Config on v1 recipes
• move test data for test_cross_compile into files (but without actually updating the migrator, after seeing how much code I'd need to update)
• mark DuplicateLinesCleanup migrator as incompatible with v1 recipes (duplicate keys are an error there)

Checklist:

• Pydantic model updated or no update needed

Cross-refs, links to issues, etc:

[beckermr]

When moving around recipes, please be careful that the tests of the recipe parser still find all of the examples. I'll look closer later.

[beckermr]

This line here in particular is what I am concerned about: https://github.com/regro/cf-scripts/blob/main/tests/test_recipe_parser.py#L1612

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 93.54839% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 75.90%. Comparing base (3b668d5) to head (1b953a3).
Report is 7 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
conda_forge_tick/migrators/cos7.py	66.66%	1 Missing ⚠️
conda_forge_tick/migrators/duplicate_lines.py	66.66%	1 Missing ⚠️

❌ Your project status has failed because the head coverage (94.05%) is below the target coverage (95.00%). You can increase the head coverage or adjust the target coverage.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3783      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   77.39%   75.90%   -1.50%     
==========================================
  Files         134      134              
  Lines       14845    14842       -3     
==========================================
- Hits        11490    11266     -224     
- Misses       3355     3576     +221     

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

[mgorny]

This line here in particular is what I am concerned about: https://github.com/regro/cf-scripts/blob/main/tests/test_recipe_parser.py#L1612

Ah, sorry, didn't expect that. Do you prefer that I move them back to top-level, or modify this test to look recursively?

[beckermr]

We should modify the list to look recursively.

[beckermr]

Thank you!

[mgorny]

Thank you!