Fix pylint false positives for ThreadPoolExecutor

[srikaaviya]

Description

This PR changes the concurrent.futures import style in three files to bypass a known no-name-in-module pylint parsing bug introduced when adding Python 3.14 support.

By using import concurrent.futures and fully qualifying concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor and concurrent.futures.Future, we cleanly resolve the false positive without needing any # pylint: disable comments or global config overrides.

Fixes #4199

Type of change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

How Has This Been Tested?

The official tox linting suites passed successfully:

Does This PR Require a Core Repo Change?

No.

Checklist:

• Followed the style guidelines of this project
• Changelogs - (N/A - purely internal linting fix)
• Unit tests - (N/A - fixing lint false positive)
• Documentation - (N/A)

[xrmx]

I don't think this is the right way to fix this. We should fix all the issue we have with a newer pylint version and then remove the comments.

[JWinermaSplunk]

I agree with @xrmx in that we should bump the pylint version instead of using the fully qualified names.

[srikaaviya]

@xrmx @DylanRussell @JWinermaSplunk I bumped pylint to 4.0.5, as anticipated, the upgrade surfaces 41 lint job failures across the repo. Should I address them in this PR? What would you recommend?

[xrmx]

@xrmx @DylanRussell @JWinermaSplunk I bumped pylint to 4.0.5, as anticipated, the upgrade surfaces 41 lint job failures across the repo. Should I address them in this PR? What would you recommend?

I would start by changing the pylint configuration to:

[DESIGN]
max-positional-arguments=10

And then re-evaluate what's left. I see there are files with 12 or even 18 occurrences but there would probably good to add a local comment to disable the warnings.

[xrmx]

@srikaaviya I've opened a PR to fix a bunch of reported issues here #4272 , I would suggest to wait for that to get in and then do the required fixes for the bump in this PR.

[srikaaviya]

@srikaaviya I've opened a PR to fix a bunch of reported issues here #4272 , I would suggest to wait for that to get in and then do the required fixes for the bump in this PR.

Sure, I'll wait until #4272 is merged.

[xrmx]

@srikaaviya I've merged #4272

[emdneto]

it seems there are more lint cases to fix

[xrmx]

it seems there are more lint cases to fix

baggage should be ignored, openai-agents is the very same error as these, for botocore I guess removing the return is enough.

[srikaaviya]

@xrmx I have addressed the changes. Please let me know if there's anything else!