Source install selector from platform support data

[bdice]

Summary

• render platform support YAML directly into the install selector through Jekyll
• derive Python versions, CUDA majors, default selections, and Conda toolkit bounds from that data
• consolidate the separate stable/nightly and Conda CUDA declarations
• add a pre-commit validator for release coverage, ordering, uniqueness, and toolkit bounds

Why

The install selector duplicated platform support values across several hardcoded arrays and a separate Conda CUDA bounds object. Serializing the existing Jekyll data keeps _data/platform_support.yml as the single source for supported Python and CUDA values without introducing another generated JSON artifact.

Validation

• pre-commit run --all-files
• rendered selector JavaScript syntax check with Node.js
• stable/nightly runtime assertions for release labels and Conda, pip, and Docker commands

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for docs-rapids-ai ready!

Built without sensitive environment variables

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	9f669fc
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/docs-rapids-ai/deploys/6a444ec2c0f102000835fdbd
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-802--docs-rapids-ai.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[rockhowse]

ok did a quick review, just so I understand a bit more

• #801

  • has been ✅ + :git-merged:
  • was a pre-req to provide data we are basically already using to test nightlies
    adds "nightly" data to the Platform Support

• #802 was a fast follow

  • uses the _data/platform_support.yml‎ as the source of truth for both release and nightly (new)
  • removes the data embedded the selector
  • now includes a python helper script and pre-check to validate the metadata matches reality?
  • simplifies the logic internally on this page
  • Reviewed the render in the PR and it looks to be good and install selector is working as expected

Makes sense to me and is basically what I was trying to articulate we do for things like this during the build meeting.