update pyproject.toml to follow PEP 639

[walid83-0]

Hi, I updated pyproject.toml following PEP 639.
Please review and merge if everything is fine.

[google-cla]

Thanks for your pull request! It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information.

For the most up to date status, view the checks section at the bottom of the pull request.

[chalmerlowe]

@walid83-0 Thanks for this suggestion. I am considering it.

Please take a look above. In order for me to be able to accept this PR, Google requires that all contributors sign the Google Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information.

[chalmerlowe]

@walid83-0

I am curious about the decision to provide a minimum version number for setuptools. What is the rationale for this decision? And why such a recent version of setuptools (i.e. "77.0.3"), which, if memory serves, came out in the past six months.

As a general rule, Google tends to avoid putting too many limits on dependency versions as our library users are a global audience with many different environments. We want to be able to enable customers to use this library with as little friction as possible.

For projects in the Googleapis organization that have pyproject.toml files, I can only find three that include a version number with setuptools and those versions are pretty old {"42", "61.0"}

ACTION: unless we have a really good reason, I request that the version bump be stripped out entirely.

[walid83-0]

Thanks for pointing this out. I mistakenly pinned setuptools to 77.0.3 simply because it was the most recent release. I understand now that this creates unnecessary friction for users. Since we don’t depend on any features from that specific version, I’ll update the requirement to be more flexible (>=61) or remove it entirely.
I’m still learning and just wanted to contribute, so thanks for the guidance.

[chalmerlowe]

Let's just remove the version number completely, please. Thanks!

[walid83-0]

Thanks for the feedback!
I've removed the version number completely as requested.
Please let me know if anything else needs adjustment.

[chalmerlowe]

Dicts appear to be deprecated. It appears that the correct format is a simple string:
Fixing this should clear up the failing tests. .

Suggested change

	license = { text = "Apache-2.0" }
	license = "Apache-2.0"

[chalmerlowe]

@walid83-0 Take a look. The tests are failing. Here is an example Error:

× Getting requirements to build editable did not run successfully.
  │ exit code: 1
  ╰─> [44 lines of output]
      configuration error: `project.license` must be string
      GIVEN VALUE:
          {
              "text": "Apache-2.0"
          }
      
      OFFENDING RULE: 'type'
      
      DEFINITION:
          {
              "type": "string"
          }
      Traceback (most recent call last):