Remove cherry-picker from requirements

[Dreamsorcerer]

This module doesn't seem to be used anywhere in our CI, nor does it even appear in our docs. It simply ends up creating some extra noise and maintenance overhead via Dependabot.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 98.74%. Comparing base (d261f8a) to head (7c3cb6d).
⚠️ Report is 283 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #11654   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   98.74%   98.74%           
=======================================
  Files         127      127           
  Lines       43467    43467           
  Branches     2327     2327           
=======================================
  Hits        42922    42922           
  Misses        389      389           
  Partials      156      156           

Flag	Coverage Δ
CI-GHA	98.63% <ø> (ø)
OS-Linux	98.36% <ø> (ø)
OS-Windows	96.69% <ø> (ø)
OS-macOS	97.58% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
Py-3.10.11	97.14% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-3.10.18	97.64% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.11.13	97.85% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
Py-3.11.9	97.35% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.12.10	97.45% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-3.12.11	97.95% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
Py-3.13.7	98.20% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-3.14.0	98.15% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.14.0t	97.22% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-pypy3.10.16-7.3.19	90.95% <ø> (-3.89%)	⬇️
VM-macos	97.58% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
VM-ubuntu	98.36% <ø> (ø)
VM-windows	96.69% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #11654 will not alter performance

_{Comparing remove-cherry-picker (7c3cb6d) with master (d261f8a)}

Summary

✅ 59 untouched

[webknjaz]

@Dreamsorcerer there's also a config for this CPython's cherry-picker tool in the repo. It is helpful when one wants to create a bunch of backports from local command-line. For example, when the bot fails. Andrew and I would use it on occasion. Any CPython Core Dev would be familiar. I've been meaning to make it possible to mention it in Patchback's conflict comments..

Not sure if we need to have deps for it in the repo but we should definitely keep the config. Also, it might be a good idea to mention the possibility of using it in the backporting docs. But it's probably best for the contributors to have it installed as a separate app through pipx / uvx / etc.

Looks like CPython docs isn't verbose about it in https://devguide.python.org/getting-started/git-boot-camp/#backporting-merged-changes, but when their bot fails to backport, it posts the exact cherry_picker command to run, in comments.

I have it set up in a few places in Ansible + made a bunch of contributions over the years.

[Dreamsorcerer]

Makes sense. So developers can manually install the package if/when they need it.

[patchback]

Backport to 3.14: 💚 backport PR created

✅ Backport PR branch: patchback/backports/3.14/302243e37274bd9e5a32e405ca11b1b0306f75b1/pr-11654

Backported as #11662

🤖 @patchback
I'm built with octomachinery and
my source is open — https://github.com/sanitizers/patchback-github-app.