Relax protected namespace config default

[sydney-runkle]

Closes #10315

Decided not to warn on method overrides, as that's an incredibly common practice in Python, and type checking does enough warning here in cases of incompatibility.

[hyperlint-ai]

1 files reviewed, 1 outstanding issue(s) found.

[cloudflare-workers-and-pages]

Deploying pydantic-docs with    Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit:	36a7816
Status:	✅  Deploy successful!
Preview URL:	https://5749a93c.pydantic-docs.pages.dev
Branch Preview URL:	https://protected-ns.pydantic-docs.pages.dev

View logs

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #10441 will not alter performance

_{Comparing protected-ns (36a7816) with main (296f2ca)}

Summary

✅ 38 untouched benchmarks

[github-actions]

Coverage report

This PR does not seem to contain any modification to coverable code.

[samuelcolvin]

one real question, otherwise LGTM.

[hyperlint-ai]

1 files reviewed, 2 total issue(s) found.

[sydney-runkle]

I think this should be ready for review. Given #10493, I actually don't think it's necessary that we add model_fields, model_extra, etc to the protected_namespaces default:

from pydantic import BaseModel
from typing import Any

class User(BaseModel):
    model_fields: list[str]
    model_computed_fields: list[str]
    model_extra: dict[str, Any]
    model_fields_set: set[str]

user = User(model_fields=['id', 'name'], model_computed_fields=[], model_extra={}, model_fields_set={'id', 'name'})
"""
/Users/programming/pydantic_work/pydantic/pydantic/_internal/_fields.py:190: UserWarning: Field name "model_fields" in "User" shadows an attribute in parent "BaseModel"
  warnings.warn(
/Users/programming/pydantic_work/pydantic/pydantic/_internal/_fields.py:190: UserWarning: Field name "model_computed_fields" in "User" shadows an attribute in parent "BaseModel"
  warnings.warn(
/Users/programming/pydantic_work/pydantic/pydantic/_internal/_fields.py:190: UserWarning: Field name "model_extra" in "User" shadows an attribute in parent "BaseModel"
  warnings.warn(
/Users/programming/pydantic_work/pydantic/pydantic/_internal/_fields.py:190: UserWarning: Field name "model_fields_set" in "User" shadows an attribute in parent "BaseModel"
  warnings.warn(
"""

I've also enabled support for compiled patterns, though I don't think that's necessary, as all other overrides are methods - which are standard practice to override, and you'll get type checking warnings if signature isn't compatible or b) warnings if something conflicts with the protected namespaces.

[Viicos]

Do we also want to add model_construct here?

[sydney-runkle]

Good question, cc @samuelcolvin @dmontagu

[sydney-runkle]

Following up here - we decided we didn't need to add model_construct - that's not a namespace we anticipate expanding in the same way we do for model_dump_ etc, you can imagine python, json, some_other_format.