lint: use shared subtree exclusions in shell linters #36749

This PR partially addresses the subtree lint scope inconsistencies discussed in #34928.

The Python shell linters, lint-shell.py and lint-shell-locale.py, now use SHARED_EXCLUDED_SUBTREES instead of maintaining hardcoded subtree exclusions.

This also removes the overly broad regex in lint-shell.py while preserving the current set of excluded shell scripts.

The explicit per-linter subtree opt-ins discussed in #34928 are not implemented in this PR. This change focuses on consolidating the existing exclusions without modifying the current lint scope.

Compared the original exclusion logic against the shared subtree list for all 61 tracked .sh files:

Both linters preserve their existing .sh file exclusion scope.

The following checks also passed:

• ./ci/lint.py
• ./ci/lint.py --lint=all_python_linters
• ./ci/lint.py --lint=py_lint

Related to #34928.

<!--e57a25ab6845829454e8d69fc972939a-->

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

<!--006a51241073e994b41acfe9ec718e94-->

External sites

• Code coverage & benchmarks: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/36749
• Ralph review <img src=https://review.fish.foo/assets/bitcoin/bitcoin/36749.png alt="Ralph review status"> https://git.fish.foo/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/36749#author-ralph

<!--021abf342d371248e50ceaed478a90ca-->

Reviews

See the guideline and AI policy for information on the review process. A summary of reviews will appear here.

<!--5faf32d7da4f0f540f40219e4f7537a3-->

Given the direction of #36742, would it make more sense to limit this PR to lint-shell-locale.py and leave the lint-shell.py changes to your PR, @maflcko?

thx, but I think it is unclear if this is the right fix. My recommendation would be #34928 (comment), but let's wait a week or two for further input before implementing this.

Closing this for now in the meantime.