split rectify and modify as decided in #343

[nevrome]

As decided in #343 I renamed rectify to modify and then built a new rectify that simply searches for packages with changed checksums to automatically fix them. This is a breaking change, of course. This PR also includes new dependencies that speed up the MD5 sum computation considerably.

Remaining TODOs are:

1. Add a warning or generally better command line output to modify to highlight that it changes all input packages.
2. Add some golden tests for rectify.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 63.28502% with 76 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 52.53%. Comparing base (58d10f8) to head (c4e87bc).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/Poseidon/CLI/Trident/Modify.hs	58.27%	41 Missing and 22 partials ⚠️
src/Poseidon/CLI/Trident/Rectify.hs	74.41%	5 Missing and 6 partials ⚠️
...Poseidon/CLI/Trident/OptparseApplicativeParsers.hs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
src/Poseidon/Core/Package.hs	83.33%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #401      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   52.36%   52.53%   +0.17%     
==========================================
  Files          37       38       +1     
  Lines        6065     6129      +64     
  Branches      648      654       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits         3176     3220      +44     
- Misses       2241     2255      +14     
- Partials      648      654       +6     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[stschiff]

Nice, looks great, from my perspective. Just to be clear: the new rectify only detects changed checksums, not missing ones. That's intended, right?

[nevrome]

Yes - that's what I implemented. But I wasn't sure about this. My reasoning was that rectify should purely "make things right", and a package without checksums is valid. But now I'm wondering if it's more convenient in practical use to have it add the checksums. What do you think?

[stschiff]

I think it would be less surprising if this updates and also adds checksums in case they're missing.

[nevrome]

Yes - I agree now. #406 implements the relevant change.