Add Python 3.14 support and improve coverage

[bigcat88]

Summary

• Add Python 3.14 to unit test matrix
• Add Python version badge to README
• (More commits coming to improve code coverage based on Codecov results)

Test plan

• CI passes on Python 3.12, 3.13, 3.14
• Coverage reports upload successfully
• Improve coverage based on Codecov gaps

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation

  • Added Python version compatibility badge indicating support for Python 3.12–3.14.

• Chores

  • Expanded CI test matrix to include Python 3.14.
  • Updated Codecov reporting to evaluate status after 5 builds.
  • Updated packaging/configuration and refreshed formatter pin.

• Tests

  • Added integration test exercising env-var driven configuration.
  • Added poll close response test verifying voter details.
  • Added state initialization validation tests.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 96.40%. Comparing base (d609c89) to head (7e212f8).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main       #6      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   95.34%   96.40%   +1.05%     
==========================================
  Files          11       11              
  Lines         473      473              
==========================================
+ Hits          451      456       +5     
+ Misses         22       17       -5     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	94.29% <ø> (+2.32%)	⬆️
nc32	94.29% <ø> (+2.32%)	⬆️
nc33	94.29% <ø> (+2.32%)	⬆️
py3.12	22.83% <ø> (+8.03%)	⬆️
py3.13	22.83% <ø> (+8.03%)	⬆️
py3.14	22.83% <ø> (?)
unit	22.83% <ø> (+8.03%)	⬆️

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.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 748bf5e1-be4f-45e8-8e94-d96ba10c9a2e

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 61166b7 and 7e212f8.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• .pre-commit-config.yaml
• pyproject.toml

✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)

• .pre-commit-config.yaml

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Expanded CI/testing to include Python 3.14, added Codecov status configuration, updated packaging/pytest metadata, bumped a pre-commit hook, and added several new tests (integration and state unit tests); README badge updated to show Python 3.12–3.14.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
CI Workflows & Coverage .github/workflows/tests-unit.yml, codecov.yml	Added Python 3.14 to the unit test matrix; added Codecov status for project and patch with after_n_builds: 5.
Documentation README.md	Added Python compatibility badge showing 3.12–3.14.
Packaging & Tooling pyproject.toml, .pre-commit-config.yaml	Added Python 3.14 to classifiers, moved/adjusted pytest and setuptools config table keys, and updated pyproject-fmt hook pin.
Integration Tests tests/integration/test_server.py, tests/integration/test_talk_polls.py	Added env-driven server initialization integration test and a poll-close test that asserts voter details are included for public-result polls.
Unit Tests (state) tests/test_state.py	New tests asserting get_client()/get_config() raise RuntimeError when module state is uninitialized.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• Add code coverage with Codecov #5 — touches the same CI/tests workflow files, README badges, and Codecov configuration.

Suggested reviewers

• oleksandr-nc

Poem

🐰 A rabbit hops, nose in the grass,
Python versions tall as blades that pass,
Tests awaken, coverage hums bright,
State and polls snug in the night. 🥕✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately summarizes the two main objectives: adding Python 3.14 support (reflected in the workflow matrix, README badge, and pyproject.toml changes) and improving coverage (reflected in the codecov.yml configuration and new test coverage additions).
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch feature/p2-python314-coverage

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

tests/integration/test_talk_polls.py (1)

373-376: Avoid order-coupled assertion on voter details.

At Line 376, indexing details[0] assumes stable ordering. This can make the test flaky if the API returns the same entries in a different order.

Suggested test hardening

-            assert poll["details"][0]["actorId"] == "admin"
+            assert any(d.get("actorId") == "admin" for d in poll["details"])

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@tests/integration/test_talk_polls.py` around lines 373 - 376, The test
currently assumes a stable order by asserting poll["details"][0]["actorId"] ==
"admin"; change this to a order-agnostic check by verifying that poll contains a
"details" list and that at least one element in poll["details"] has actorId ==
"admin" (e.g., replace the index-based assertion with an any(...) style check
over poll["details"]). This targets the assertions around poll and its "details"
list to avoid flakiness when ordering changes.

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In @.github/workflows/tests-unit.yml:
- Line 15: The package classifiers in pyproject.toml are missing Python 3.14
even though CI runs tests on 3.14; update the "classifiers" list in
pyproject.toml (the "Programming Language :: Python ::" entries) to include
"Programming Language :: Python :: 3.14" alongside the existing 3.12 and 3.13
entries so the declared supported Python versions match the CI-tested versions.

---

Nitpick comments:
In `@tests/integration/test_talk_polls.py`:
- Around line 373-376: The test currently assumes a stable order by asserting
poll["details"][0]["actorId"] == "admin"; change this to a order-agnostic check
by verifying that poll contains a "details" list and that at least one element
in poll["details"] has actorId == "admin" (e.g., replace the index-based
assertion with an any(...) style check over poll["details"]). This targets the
assertions around poll and its "details" list to avoid flakiness when ordering
changes.

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: b88b42e5-c760-4e83-8a1c-7bfdaa4123bc

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d609c89 and 61166b7.

📒 Files selected for processing (6)

• .github/workflows/tests-unit.yml
• README.md
• codecov.yml
• tests/integration/test_server.py
• tests/integration/test_talk_polls.py
• tests/test_state.py