chore: ✨ Update devcontainer.json with new features

[Anselmoo]

• Update devcontainer.json with new features to switch latest or specific version
• Add poetry shell command to setup.sh

All PR-Submissions:

---

• Have you followed the guidelines in our Contributing document?
• Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open
  Pull Requests for the same
  update/change?

New ✨✨ Feature-Submissions:

---

• Does your submission pass tests?
• Have you lint your code locally prior to submission? Fixed:
• This PR is for a new feature, not a bug fix.

Changes to ⚙️ Core-Features:

---

• Have you added an explanation of what your changes do and why you'd like
  us to include them?
• Have you written new tests for your core changes, as applicable?
• Have you successfully run tests with your changes locally?

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 33 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +28 -5
Percentile : 13.2%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.json : +27 -5
.sh : +1 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
No data about Duplication

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[sourcery-ai]

Hey @Anselmoo - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!

Here's what I looked at during the review

• 🟡 General issues: 3 issues found
• 🟢 Security: all looks good
• 🟢 Testing: all looks good
• 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
• 🟢 Docstrings: all looks good

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment to tell me if it was helpful.}

[sourcery-ai]

issue (code_clarification): Duplicate feature keys for Docker in Dev Container configuration.

The configuration includes both 'docker-in-docker' and 'docker-in-docker:2'. Ensure this is intentional and not a duplication error.

[sourcery-ai]

suggestion (code_refinement): Using 'latest' version for GitHub CLI.

Specifying 'latest' for the GitHub CLI version might lead to unexpected changes. Consider pinning a specific version for more predictable builds.

Suggested change

	"ghcr.io/devcontainers/features/github-cli:1": {
	"ghcr.io/devcontainers/features/github-cli:1": {
	"installDirectlyFromGitHubRelease": true,
	"version": "2.0.0"
	},

[sourcery-ai]

issue (code_clarification): Consider the necessity of 'poetry shell' in setup script.

Activating a shell might not be effective in a script. If the intention is to prepare the environment, ensure this command's effects persist as expected.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (d3e674e) to head (0513d92).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main     #1237   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           44        44           
  Lines         4467      4467           
=========================================
  Hits          4467      4467           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	100.00% <ø> (ø)

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