Replace fkirc/skip-duplicate-actions in CI workflows

[rtibbles]

❌ This issue is not open for contribution. Visit Contributing guidelines to learn about the contributing process and how to find suitable issues.

Overview

Replace fkirc/skip-duplicate-actions in le-utils's two workflows following the Strategy in learningequality/.github#83. pythontest.yml currently starts every matrix runner and skips its steps, and the ruleset requires 8 per-combination checks.

Complexity: Medium
Target branch: main

The Change

• pre-commit.yml: pre_job passes no path list. Delete it and the needs/if on linting.
• pythontest.yml: replace the step-level ifs with job-level ifs on unit_test and unit_test_eol_python, and add an aggregator job named Python tests as the single required check.

Acceptance Criteria

• No workflow references fkirc/skip-duplicate-actions.
• The pythontest.yml path list keeps its current patterns.
• On a skip, no unit_test or unit_test_eol_python matrix runner starts.
• The PR body lists the ruleset change: remove the 5 Python unit tests (<version>) and 3 Python unit tests for EOL Python versions (<version>) checks, and add Python tests.
• The PR links one run where the gated jobs ran and one where they were skipped with every required check green (a run on the contributor's fork is acceptable).
• actionlint passes on every changed workflow.

AI usage

I used Claude Code to survey this repo's workflows and required checks, and to draft this issue. I chose the approach and reviewed it before filing.

[rtibblesbot]

Plan: Drop fkirc/skip-duplicate-actions from pre-commit.yml and pythontest.yml; gate Python tests at job level behind one required check, Python tests.

• Drop path-less pre_job from pre-commit.yml
• Gate pythontest.yml at job level behind a Python tests aggregator
• Self-review the produced code

Assumptions — the issue did not settle these; say so if one is wrong.

• Python tests gates the 3.14 leg, which no required check covers today; if 3.14 must stay optional, give that leg continue-on-error.

---

@rtibblesbot's comments are generated by an LLM, and should be evaluated accordingly

How was this generated?

• Implemented code following the pre-approved plan using test-driven development (red-green-refactor)
• Ran the project's full test suite and linter before committing
• For UI changes: captured live screenshots to verify rendering
• For backend changes: verified with example API/CLI output