Revert "[pre-commit.ci] pre-commit autoupdate (#8872)"

[CaedenPH]

Look at #8877 for info

This reverts commit 5aefc00.

Reverts #8872

Breaks many algorithms as shown in these failing tests (from this pr #8875) https://github.com/TheAlgorithms/Python/actions/runs/5629561962/job/15254651560?pr=8875

• Add an algorithm?
• Fix a bug or typo in an existing algorithm?
• Documentation change?

Checklist:

• I have read CONTRIBUTING.md.
• This pull request is all my own work -- I have not plagiarized.
• I know that pull requests will not be merged if they fail the automated tests.
• This PR only changes one algorithm file. To ease review, please open separate PRs for separate algorithms.
• All new Python files are placed inside an existing directory.
• All filenames are in all lowercase characters with no spaces or dashes.
• All functions and variable names follow Python naming conventions.
• All function parameters and return values are annotated with Python type hints.
• All functions have doctests that pass the automated testing.
• All new algorithms include at least one URL that points to Wikipedia or another similar explanation.
• If this pull request resolves one or more open issues then the description above includes the issue number(s) with a closing keyword: "Fixes #ISSUE-NUMBER".

[cclauss]

Suggested change

	rev: v0.0.277
	rev: v0.0.280

And then disable individual rules in pyproject.toml preferably in per-file-ignores.

[cclauss]

Let's not go backwards.

[CaedenPH]

@cclauss The rules that are newly implemented seem like good rules. For example, one of the rules states that there can not be more than 20 if/else branches, which is a good rule, and fails on red_black_tree.py
Error: data_structures/binary_tree/red_black_tree.py:155:9: PLR0912 Too many branches (21 > 20)
It is difficult to fix this file, because it is so embedded that the code is hard to understand. This being said, I don’t want to have to mark the whole file as broken, nor do I want to ignore this error

This is a revert pr, so the whole idea is to go back to a working version. If we do not want to do that, I can work on a pull request fixing all the ruff changes instead.