add makefile targets to install codespell and verify using codespell

[nawazkh]

What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup

What this PR does / why we need it:

• Adds two makefile targets
  • make codespell installs codespell binary in the hack/tools/bin/codespell/ dir
  • make verify-codespell runs $(CODESPELL) $(ROOT_DIR) --ignore-words=$(ROOT_DIR)/.codespellignore --skip="*.git,*_artifacts,*.sum,$(ROOT_DIR)/hack" at the root of the codebase.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):

• make verify should help users in correcting codespell errors before raising a PR.

Special notes for your reviewer:

• You may notice that codespell gets installed in hack/tools/bin/codespell directory. That is because installing codespell brings along other dependencies. I tried using pip --no-deps install .. codespell but could not get rid of other dependencies you see in the picture below.
  

• cherry-pick candidate

TODOs:

• squashed commits
• includes documentation
• adds unit tests

Release note:

NONE

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage has no change and project coverage change: -0.08 ⚠️

Comparison is base (dd692a8) 54.05% compared to head (8b5d353) 53.98%.

❗ Current head 8b5d353 differs from pull request most recent head 782f15d. Consider uploading reports for the commit 782f15d to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3630      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   54.05%   53.98%   -0.08%     
==========================================
  Files         186      185       -1     
  Lines       18833    18700     -133     
==========================================
- Hits        10181    10096      -85     
+ Misses       8105     8061      -44     
+ Partials      547      543       -4     

see 15 files with indirect coverage changes

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

[nawazkh]

I had to move codespell from $(TOOLS_BIN_DIR)/$(CODESPELL_DIST_DIR)/bin/$(CODESPELL_BIN) to $(TOOLS_BIN_DIR)/$(CODESPELL_DIST_DIR) to avoid running into ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'codespell_lib' errors.

[nawazkh]

/cc @mboersma

[nawazkh]

/retest

[nawazkh]

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-e2e-aks

[mboersma]

I think this makes sense, because it's not a good experience to have your PR blocked by a linter that you can't run locally first.

It looks good to me overall. I'll try it out.

[jackfrancis]

If we ship this change we'll want to ship it simultaneously with a removal of the github action, otherwise we're running it twice on each PR (see the pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-verify job that ran as part of this PR, for example).

I assume the reason we've been doing the github action up until now is because no one wanted to do the chop wood / carry water work (until @nawazkh now, I mean!) of integrating this into our local CI interfaces?

[nawazkh]

If we ship this change we'll want to ship it simultaneously with a removal of the github action, otherwise we're running it twice on each PR (see the pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-verify job that ran as part of this PR, for example).

I think that's a fair ask, thanks for pointing me to it.
I am in favor of removing the GitHub action, because the PR's make verify-codespell achieves the same as done in the Github action. In addition to that, pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-verify is most likely to block a codespell error than a GitHub action.

[nawazkh]

Commit 8b5d353 removes the codespell GitHub action.

[nawazkh]

/cc @CecileRobertMichon

[CecileRobertMichon]

Tried this locally and it worked great, thanks @nawazkh! One small comment about adding pip to developer docs

[CecileRobertMichon]

/lgtm
/assign @mboersma

I really like that we're no longer using codespell @ head with this change so we won't be broken by codespell updates like we have in the past

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 03803808eeed16afc928dec612cdf912d8c7ae16

[CecileRobertMichon]

@nawazkh any idea why the broken lints github action is failing?

[nawazkh]

@nawazkh any idea why the broken lints github action is failing?

Looks like it is pointing to some broken links. I have seen such linter links fix themselves up, but I am not sure if I should update them this time.

FILE: ./docs/book/src/topics/ssh-access.md
[✖] https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/azure-bastion/

3 links checked.

ERROR: 1 dead links found!
[✖] https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/azure-bastion/ → Status: 0

FILE: ./docs/book/src/topics/custom-dns.md

1 links checked.

FILE: ./docs/book/src/topics/getting-started.md
[✖] https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/

9 links checked.

ERROR: 1 dead links found!
[✖] https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/ → Status: 0

[nawazkh]

Ready for review! :)

[nawazkh]

/retest

[mboersma]

/lgtm
/approve

Tested locally, make verify-codespell seems to work as advertised. Thanks @nawazkh!

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 3a180a9160aea7ea00ae18910952168899530c34

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mboersma

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [mboersma]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment