GitHub Action to spellcheck and lint Python code

[cclauss]

This Action uses minimal steps to run in ~5 seconds to rapidly:

• use codespell to look for typos in the codebase, and
• use ruff to lint Python code and provide intuitive GitHub Annotations to contributors.

Tools:

• https://github.com/codespell-project/codespell#readme
• https://docs.astral.sh/ruff

% codespell --write-changes

./docs/index.rst:69: sucessfully ==> successfully
./docs/tips.rst:46: tranferring ==> transferring
./docs/etags.rst:21: presense ==> presence
./cachecontrol/filewrapper.py:41: vaguaries ==> vagaries
./cachecontrol/filewrapper.py:44: thigns ==> things
./tests/test_cache_control.py:178: wih ==> with

% ruff check --target-version=py38

Error: cachecontrol/caches/file_cache.py:9:39: F401 `typing.Union` imported but unused
Error: tests/conftest.py:163:5: E722 Do not use bare `except`
Error: tests/issue_263.py:16:1: E402 Module level import not at top of file
Error: tests/issue_263.py:16:20: F401 `pprint.pprint` imported but unused
Error: tests/test_serialization.py:5:8: F401 `pickle` imported but unused
Error: Process completed with exit code 1.

[woodruffw]

This repo is already formatted with black, which is declared as a dev-dep and is run via make format. I don't mind changing that to ruff instead, but I would strongly prefer that the switch is done by changing the dev dep + Makefile rather than adding a CI-only dependency that I'm almost certainly going to forget about 🙂

(Same goes for the spellchecker: no objection to having one, but please make it a dev dep.)

[woodruffw]

I believe this needs to be ruff check --fix to perform changes, right?

[cclauss]

Some folks want ruff to autofix but others do not often because they are used to flake8 which never fixes.

[woodruffw]

Thanks @cclauss, two nitpicks but this LGTM overall 🙂

[woodruffw]

macOS with Python 3.7 is failing for unrelated reasons: actions/setup-python#856

[woodruffw]

Let's just leave this out for now -- I'd rather merge this with a broken CI (or wait a little longer for GHA to fix it) than have a matrix exclude rule that I'll likely forget about 🙂

[woodruffw]

Thanks @cclauss! Please hold off on the CI changes for a bit -- I think what we'll want there is to have a make lint or similar that the CI then runs (using setup-python's ability to cache deps).

[cclauss]

I would highly recommend that you step up to pre-commit instead of make.

[woodruffw]

I understand that people like pre-commit, but I'm not a huge fan of git hooks-based workflows: IME people frequently fail to configure them, and they require yet another piece of global tooling (pip[x] install pre-commit) that can break between Python versions.

That isn't to say that they're bad or that Makefiles are good (they aren't!), but I find them simpler to reason about. So I'm inclined to keep this repo in a "minimal" state with just a Makefile until Python's developer tooling circularities get resolved.