no-explicit-stacklevel (B028) should allow no stacklevel when skip_file_prefixes is provided

[abrahammurciano]

Summary

According to the python documentation

The skip_file_prefixes keyword argument can be used to indicate which stack frames are ignored when counting stack levels. [...] When prefixes are supplied, stacklevel is implicitly overridden to be max(2, stacklevel).
[...]
Changed in version 3.12: Added skip_file_prefixes.

If skip_file_prefixes is provided, then the stacklevel is already set to at least 2, and the user has already explicitly skipped certain stack frames by prefix. The resulting warning will already give the caller more context about the warning since it will output a stack frame higher up than the one the warning was issued from, most likely outside of the issuing package (i.e. the caller's actual call).

Therefore I believe the B028 rule should be updated to allow either of the two parameters instead of only stacklevel.

[MichaReiser]

Makes sense, thank you

[caiquejjx]

Hi, I believe that this is already achieved here:

ruff/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_bugbear/rules/no_explicit_stacklevel.rs

Line 79 in 046c5a4

|| is_skip_file_prefixes_param_set(&call.arguments)

I also tested locally and I don't get the warning if I set the skip_file_prefixes param, so maybe only update the message to also inform about the possibility of setting skip_file_prefixes?

[abrahammurciano]

Weird, it was reporting it for me even with the skip_file_prefixes parameter set, but now it's not. Perhaps I was using an older version or something. Regardless, the documentation for this rule should probably also mention this parameter as an alternative fix for this rule.