write initial rule draft

rules/S7160/metadata.json

@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+{
+}

rules/S7160/python/metadata.json

@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+{
+  "title": "Dataclasses should be recreated using \"dataclasses.replace\"", 
+  "type": "CODE_SMELL",
+  "status": "ready",
+  "remediation": {
+    "func": "Constant\/Issue",
+    "constantCost": "5min"
+  },
+  "tags": [
+  ],
+  "defaultSeverity": "Major",
+  "ruleSpecification": "RSPEC-7160",
+  "sqKey": "S7160",
+  "scope": "All",
+  "defaultQualityProfiles": ["Sonar way"],
+  "quickfix": "unknown",
+  "code": {
+    "impacts": {
+      "MAINTAINABILITY": "MEDIUM"
+    },
+    "attribute": "CONVENTIONAL"
+  }
+}

rules/S7160/python/rule.adoc

@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+== Why is this an issue?
+
+Instead of manually recreating dataclasses, ``++dataclasses.replace(...)++`` can be used to recreate dataclasses with modified values.
+
+Alternatively, the in Python 3.13 introduced, more general-purpose ``++copy.replace(...)++`` can be used to archive the same result.
+
+
+== How to fix it
+
+=== Code examples
+
+==== Noncompliant code example
+
+[source,python,diff-id=1,diff-type=noncompliant]
+----
+from dataclasses import dataclass
+
+@dataclass
+class Point:
+    x: int
+    y: int
+
+p1 = Point(1, 2)
+p2 = Point(p1.x, 3) # Noncompliant
+----
+
+==== Compliant solution
+
+[source,python,diff-id=1,diff-type=compliant]
+----
+from dataclasses import dataclass
+import dataclasses
+import copy
+
+@dataclass
+class Point:
+    x: int
+    y: int
+
+p1 = Point(1, 2)
+p2 = dataclasses.replace(p1, y=3) # Compliant
+p3 = copy.replace(p1, y=3) # Compliant
+----
+
+//=== Pitfalls
+
+//=== Going the extra mile
+
+
+== Resources
+=== Documentation
+
+* https://docs.python.org/3/library/dataclasses.html#dataclasses.replace 
+* https://docs.python.org/3/library/copy.html#copy.replace
+//=== Articles & blog posts
+//=== Conference presentations
+//=== Standards
+//=== External coding guidelines
+//=== Benchmarks