chore: pytest log_level is better than log_cli_level

[henryiii]

Committed via https://github.com/asottile/all-repos

See scientific-python/cookie#679

[matthewfeickert]

Thanks @henryiii. Do you have any references that we can both inform ourselves on and then also note here?

[henryiii]

Yes, I paste in the reference link a few minutes after making the PRs because all-repos doesn't have a way to edit the pull request descriptions. So I open all the PRs and paste links.

Note that there's not a practical difference, since log_cli_level doesn't trigger live logging if it's in a config file, but this is more conceptually correct (and maps to the CLI better, as --log-cli-level does trigger live logging).

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 98.23%. Comparing base (edc3e9c) to head (7bdb951).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2634   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   98.23%   98.23%           
=======================================
  Files          65       65           
  Lines        4190     4190           
  Branches      453      453           
=======================================
  Hits         4116     4116           
  Misses         45       45           
  Partials       29       29           

Flag	Coverage Δ
contrib	98.11% <ø> (ø)
doctest	98.23% <ø> (ø)
unittests-3.10	96.42% <ø> (ø)
unittests-3.11	96.42% <ø> (ø)
unittests-3.12	96.42% <ø> (ø)
unittests-3.13	96.42% <ø> (ø)
unittests-3.9	96.46% <ø> (ø)

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 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.

[matthewfeickert]

Great and thanks.