lint: Remove confusing, redundant, and brittle lint-spelling #34053

1. 
   maflcko commented at 8:22 am on December 12, 2025: member

   codespell was a fun experiment. However, it has many issues, when used in this project:

   • The number of false-positives and true-positives are in the same ballpark. There are also many false-negatives, so the overall net-benefit is questionable.
   • There is often confusion around spelling errors leading to a failing CI (they do not, which was intended).
   • LLMs released this year are capable to detect typos with less false-positives and less false-negatives, so the codespell integration is a bit redundant in that sense.

   Fix all issues by removing it.

   Going forward, anyone is free to continue to use codespell, or any LLM, or any other tool, locally. Also, DrahtBot has the LLM typo linter integrated in the summary comment. I think the options are plenty, and are more than sufficient for now.

2. lint: Remove confusing, redundant, and brittle lint-spelling fa904fc683
3. DrahtBot added the label Tests on Dec 12, 2025
4. 
   DrahtBot commented at 8:22 am on December 12, 2025: contributor

   The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

   Code Coverage & Benchmarks

   For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/34053.

   Reviews

   See the guideline for information on the review process.

   Type	Reviewers
   ACK	l0rinc, rkrux, pablomartin4btc
   Concept ACK	sedited, stickies-v

   If your review is incorrectly listed, please copy-paste <!–meta-tag:bot-skip–> into the comment that the bot should ignore.

   Conflicts

   Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

   • #33968 (ci: remove doc/release-notes.md from lint-spelling.py by JeremyRubin)
   • #33522 (guix: use LIEF 0.17.1 by fanquake)

   If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.

5. 
   l0rinc commented at 8:46 am on December 12, 2025: contributor

   ACK fa904fc683c0892eb800ddb986fdc0c646721077
6. 
   sedited commented at 8:47 am on December 12, 2025: contributor

   Concept ACK
7. 
   stickies-v commented at 10:58 am on December 12, 2025: contributor

   Concept ACK. Didn’t seem to be a useful test, so best to remove it.
8. rkrux approved
9. 
   rkrux commented at 11:20 am on December 12, 2025: contributor

   ACK fa904fc683c0892eb800ddb986fdc0c646721077
10. DrahtBot requested review from stickies-v on Dec 12, 2025
11. DrahtBot requested review from sedited on Dec 12, 2025
12. 
    pablomartin4btc commented at 8:32 pm on December 12, 2025: member

    ACK fa904fc683c0892eb800ddb986fdc0c646721077
13. 
    fanquake commented at 5:18 pm on December 17, 2025: member

    I think it’s ok for linters to be removed as long as they aren’t causing failures / enforcing anything.
14. fanquake merged this on Dec 17, 2025
15. fanquake closed this on Dec 17, 2025

    ---

16. maflcko deleted the branch on Dec 17, 2025

Contributors
maflcko DrahtBot l0rinc sedited stickies-v rkrux pablomartin4btc fanquake

Review Requested
sedited stickies-v

Labels
Tests