CI: implement codespell check for custom word mappings

[sappelhoff]

minor, came up in #1289

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Base: 88.33% // Head: 88.33% // No change to project coverage 👍

Coverage data is based on head (45a78b6) compared to base (296ec42).
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1322   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   88.33%   88.33%           
=======================================
  Files          11       11           
  Lines        1080     1080           
=======================================
  Hits          954      954           
  Misses        126      126           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
tools/schemacode/bidsschematools/render/text.py	97.39% <ø> (ø)

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[Remi-Gau]

LGTM. Thanks @sappelhoff

[Remi-Gau]

not for this PR, but may be worth having a copespell config + CI to avoid those kind of inconsistencies creeping back in. Should be doable, no?

https://github.com/codespell-project/codespell

[sappelhoff]

Yes, agreed that should be a good thing for us, as we have already had several such "wording PRs"

[effigies]

I would go the other way. English tends to adopt hyphens when words are new and then drop them when they become common, except when doing so causes ambiguity. If we have both forms, then it typically means the hyphen is the older form on the way out.

Additionally, Merriam-Webster says "less commonly sub-directory", so I would go with the more common form.

[Remi-Gau]

I would go the other way. English tends to adopt hyphens when words are new and then drop them when they become common, except when doing so causes ambiguity. If we have both forms, then it typically means the hyphen is the older form on the way out.

Additionally, Merriam-Webster says "less commonly sub-directory", so I would go with the more common form.

Fine with me as long as we try to stick to a single one.

[sappelhoff]

I am also fine with that, thanks for chiming in Chris.

I'll turn it to subdir consistently and add a CI check that we can later re-use for other words we want to be consistent on.

[Remi-Gau]

not for this PR, but may be worth having a copespell config + CI to avoid those kind of inconsistencies creeping back in. Should be doable, no?

https://github.com/codespell-project/codespell

previous similar PRs:

• [MISC] consistently use "directory" instead of "folder" as a term #1044

[Remi-Gau]

@effigies any reason why codespell.yml was removed in this PR?

I think I may be missing something so I don't want to bring it back in case you set up something else instead.

https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/pull/1302/files

[effigies]

All the validation steps were put into a single workflow.

[Remi-Gau]

All the validation steps were put into a single workflow.

oops my bad. I thought that the codespell.yml was a config for codespell file used by some other automated CI and not a typical github action.

[sappelhoff]

haha, now look at all those "folder" words that have already crept in due to a lacking CI step.

I'll correct these in this PR as well, following #1044

[Remi-Gau]

haha, now look at all those "folder" words that have already crept in due to a lacking CI step.

I'll correct these in this PR as well, following #1044

should we update the PR title,then?

[sappelhoff]

it looks like it's fine, but it might not be:

https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/actions/runs/3265755715/jobs/5368473030

[effigies]

My guess is those are just listing the with: options. The configuration should still be working. Try removing fo from the codespell list and see if it flags the PDF build.

[sappelhoff]

My guess is those are just listing the with: options. The configuration should still be working. Try removing fo from the codespell list and see if it flags the PDF build.

indeed, that is the case. Thanks!

[Remi-Gau]

Wanna add it to pre-commit?

  - repo: https://github.com/codespell-project/codespell
    rev: v2.2.2
    hooks:
      - id: codespell
``