refactor(chezmoi): simplify package installation scripts

[entelecheia]

What type of PR is this? (check all applicable)

• 🍕 Feature
• 🐛 Bug Fix
• 📝 Documentation Update
• 🎨 Style
• 🧑‍💻 Code Refactor
• 🔥 Performance Improvements
• ✅ Test
• 🤖 Build
• 🔁 CI
• 📦 Chore (Release)
• ⏩ Revert

Description

Related Tickets & Documents

Mobile & Desktop Screenshots/Recordings

Added tests?

• 👍 yes
• 🙅 no, because they aren't needed
• 🙋 no, because I need help

Added to documentation?

• 📜 README.md
• 📓 docs
• 🙅 no documentation needed

[optional] Are there any post-deployment tasks we need to perform?

[optional] What gif best describes this PR or how it makes you feel?

_{Mention [stepsize] in a comment if you'd like to report some technical debt. See examples here.}

[codesandbox]

Review or Edit in CodeSandbox

Open the branch in Web Editor • VS Code • Insiders

Open Preview

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 10 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +5 -5
Percentile : 4%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.tmpl : +2 -2
chezmoi/.chezmoitemplates/install-apt-prerequisites : +3 -3

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[sourcery-ai]

We have skipped reviewing this pull request. We don't currently review these file types ['.tmpl'] - Let us know if you'd like us to change this.