refactor toxenvs, use OpenAstronomy workflows, and move MacOS jobs to schedule

[zacharyburnett]

This PR abstracts CI workflows to the OpenAstronomy workflows; this should reduce maintenance for updating and maintaining actions. Additionally, these changes move the majority of MacOS jobs to the weekly scheduled workflow. This should alleviate the issue where the limited MacOS runners for the organization are not available for CI jobs.

• add tox.ini with toxenvs from Romancal
• test various Python versions on ubuntu and macos
• use ruff instead of flake8 to check lint rules moved to replace flake8 with ruff #77

after merging, the Required Statuses should also be updated

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch and project coverage have no change.

Comparison is base (809607c) 54.17% compared to head (4c8d77b) 54.17%.

❗ Current head 4c8d77b differs from pull request most recent head 5959550. Consider uploading reports for the commit 5959550 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master      #75   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   54.17%   54.17%           
=======================================
  Files          25       25           
  Lines        3057     3057           
=======================================
  Hits         1656     1656           
  Misses       1401     1401           

see 2 files with indirect coverage changes

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[stscieisenhamer]

General curmudgeon/grey-beard start about flake8 to ruff: Why? Speed-up is a good thing, however version "0.0.187", though usually I do not take much stock in versions, still seems a bit early. Big question is IDE support: Is there any? Also, losing the flake8 configuration will re-introduce unneeded noise. Also, how will this play with depending packages?

Regardless, will need some developer documentation at least stating what is being used.

[zacharyburnett]

General curmudgeon/grey-beard start about flake8 to ruff: Why? Speed-up is a good thing, however version "0.0.187", though usually I do not take much stock in versions, still seems a bit early. Big question is IDE support: Is there any? Also, losing the flake8 configuration will re-introduce unneeded noise. Also, how will this play with depending packages?

Regardless, will need some developer documentation at least stating what is being used.

Mainly, I am looking toward ruff for speedup, and support for pyproject.toml (to reduce clutter in the root directory). You're right however that it's still in development; I will separate the change into another PR so we can decide on it separately.

EDIT: moved to #77

[stscieisenhamer]

LGTM.

Related things that could probably be done, in other PRs, include updating the README to document how to install, setup development, test, etc. About time this becomes a proper package.

Also, for the group itself, a discussion on the changes/new stuff, such as tox and linting changes, would be in order. Possibly at an all-hands.

[WilliamJamieson]

@zacharyburnett it appears there is an issue with CRDS for jwst and romancal, can you take a look at these? I would like to merge this before merging #79.

[WilliamJamieson]

@zacharyburnett it looks like CRDS is working for JWST now but not for Roman. Is this because there is not a public CRDS for Roman yet?