Fix docs and add overlap test for negated per-file-ignores (#10863)

Refs #3172 

## Summary

Fix a typo in the docs example, and add a test for the case where a
negative pattern and a positive pattern overlap.

The behavior here is simple: patterns (positive or negative) are always
additive if they hit (i.e. match for a positive pattern, don't match for
a negated pattern). We never "un-ignore" previously-ignored rules based
on a pattern (positive or negative) failing to hit.

It's simple enough that I don't really see other cases we need to add
tests for (the tests we have cover all branches in the ignores_from_path
function that implements the core logic), but open to reviewer feedback.

I also didn't end up changing the docs to explain this more, because I
think they are accurate as written and don't wrongly imply any more
complex behavior. Open to reviewer feedback on this as well!

After some discussion, I think allowing negative patterns to un-ignore
rules is too confusing and easy to get wrong; if we need that, we should
add `per-file-selects` instead.

## Test Plan

Test/docs only change; tests pass, docs render and look right.

---------

Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@gmail.com>

crates/ruff_workspace/src/options.rs

@@ -916,7 +916,7 @@ pub struct LintCommonOptions {
             "__init__.py" = ["E402"]
             "path/to/file.py" = ["E402"]
             # Ignore `D` rules everywhere except for the `src/` directory.
-            "!src/**.py" = ["F401"]
+            "!src/**.py" = ["D"]
         "#
     )]
     pub per_file_ignores: Option<FxHashMap<String, Vec<RuleSelector>>>,