[nightt5879]

This fixes #26450.

TID254 now reports policy violations without offering a fix when an import statement contains multiple names. Single-name imports remain fixable. This prevents conflicting lazy-import requirements from repeatedly adding and removing lazy, and uses the same single-member check as TID255.

The tests cover both import and from ... import ..., including conflicting policies and fixes in both directions.

btw: cuz i not the natvie English speaker, i will use ai to imporve my txt, which may let it look like a AI generate....

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 2b9e1c75ab

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[MichaReiser]

Thank you. Please take a look at our AI Policy (https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#use-of-ai). Your summary gives me a strong impression that it was written by AI

[nightt5879]

Thank you. Please take a look at our AI Policy (https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#use-of-ai). Your summary gives me a strong impression that it was written by AI

thanks for pointing this out. i read the AI policy.

i used AI tooling to help open the PR and draft the first description, but i reviewed the diff and tested it locally on Windows.

and i want to know weather the review comment by the [chatgpt-codex-connector] that i should handle it?

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: dda755d551

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: b75a2639e0

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[ntBre]

Thanks for looking into this and coming up with a fix! However, the new code looks quite complicated, and I didn't realize that TID255 already bails out without a fix if multiple imports are affected:

ruff/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_tidy_imports/rules/lazy_import_immediately_resolved.rs

Lines 93 to 97 in aee4f26

	};
	let binding = semantic.binding(binding_id);
	let Some(import) = lazy_import_statement(binding, semantic) else {
	return;

What do you think about doing the same here? I think a minimal patch like this would share the same helper here and take care of the issue:

diff --git a/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_tidy_imports/rules/lazy_import_immediately_resolved.rs b/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_tidy_imports/rules/lazy_import_immediately_resolved.rs
index 2cb5fee1e4..9eab43f6b3 100644
--- a/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_tidy_imports/rules/lazy_import_immediately_resolved.rs
+++ b/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_tidy_imports/rules/lazy_import_immediately_resolved.rs
@@ -126,8 +126,8 @@ fn lazy_import_statement<'a>(binding: &Binding, semantic: &SemanticModel<'a>) ->
     .then_some(stmt)
 }
 
-/// Return `true` if removing `lazy` only makes the resolved import eager.
-fn is_single_member_import(stmt: &Stmt) -> bool {
+/// Return `true` if changing `lazy` affects only one imported name.
+pub(super) fn is_single_member_import(stmt: &Stmt) -> bool {
     match stmt {
         Stmt::Import(StmtImport { names, .. }) | Stmt::ImportFrom(StmtImportFrom { names, .. }) => {
             names.len() == 1
diff --git a/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_tidy_imports/rules/lazy_import_mismatch.rs b/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_tidy_imports/rules/lazy_import_mismatch.rs
index 1aae71b8de..09b49a8c8c 100644
--- a/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_tidy_imports/rules/lazy_import_mismatch.rs
+++ b/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_tidy_imports/rules/lazy_import_mismatch.rs
@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ use ruff_macros::{ViolationMetadata, derive_message_formats};
 use ruff_python_ast::{PythonVersion, Stmt, StmtImport, StmtImportFrom};
 use ruff_text_size::{Ranged, TextRange, TextSize};
 
+use super::lazy_import_immediately_resolved::is_single_member_import;
 use crate::checkers::ast::Checker;
 use crate::codes::Category;
 use crate::rules::flake8_tidy_imports::rules::BannedModuleImportPolicies;
@@ -50,7 +51,7 @@ enum LazyImportPolicy {
 }
 
 impl Violation for LazyImportMismatch {
-    const FIX_AVAILABILITY: FixAvailability = FixAvailability::Always;
+    const FIX_AVAILABILITY: FixAvailability = FixAvailability::Sometimes;
 
     #[derive_message_formats]
     fn message(&self) -> String {
@@ -168,6 +169,10 @@ fn report_lazy_import_policy(
     policy: LazyImportPolicy,
 ) {
     let mut diagnostic = checker.report_diagnostic(LazyImportMismatch { policy, name }, range);
+    // Changing the entire statement could violate another imported name's policy.
+    if !is_single_member_import(stmt) {
+        return;
+    }
     match policy {
         LazyImportPolicy::RequireLazy => {
             diagnostic.set_fix(Fix::unsafe_edit(Edit::insertion(

[nightt5879]

@ntBre

好，我看了一下这个 PR，我之前弄的确实有点复杂了。我觉得你提出的方向是可以的，我按照这个方向修改了一个版本，提交了 commit 修改。（因为我不是英语母语使用者，这个用了 AI 进行翻译我的中文。）

English translation (AI-assisted):

I took another look at this PR, and my previous implementation was indeed a bit too complicated. I think your suggested approach makes sense, so I've updated the code in that direction and pushed a new commit. I'm not a native English speaker, so I used AI to translate my Chinese reply.

[ntBre]

Thank you! I made a small tweak to the docs and then switched the tests over to our new mdtest framework, but this looks great.

[astral-sh-bot]

ruff-ecosystem results

Linter (stable)

✅ ecosystem check detected no linter changes.

Linter (preview)

✅ ecosystem check detected no linter changes.