Apply D105 to the Models Module Partly

[Satoshi-Sh]

Related Issue

#37523
##Checks

• airflow/models/abstractoperator.py
• airflow/models/baseoperator.py
• airflow/models/connection.py
• airflow/models/dag.py
• airflow/models/dagrun.py
• airflow/models/dagwarning.py
• airflow/models/dataset.py
• airflow/models/expandinput.py
• airflow/models/log.py
• airflow/models/mappedoperator.py

---

^ Add meaningful description above
Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.
In case of fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in a newsfragment file, named {pr_number}.significant.rst or {issue_number}.significant.rst, in newsfragments.

[potiuk]

Actually - I am not sure - do we relly want to keep that rule @Taragolis -to explain all the dunder methods ? Is there a way to exclude those from the check? It seems rather unnecessary ?

[Taragolis]

Actually - I am not sure - do we relly want to keep that rule @Taragolis -to explain all the dunder methods ?

I’m not the correct person who could explain why we select this rule in #10742
Maybe some discussion in dev list exists, or it selected after discussion in slack or just a random selection

I just a person who consolidate this rule in the single task

About my thoughts I add it into another PR: #37602 (comment) tl;dr In some places it might be useful in the other it useless/redundant and might confuse

[potiuk]

I started thread at the devlist.

[potiuk]

As discussed in #38452 - we remove the D105 rule from our checks.