We had a discussion in the past on the topic
#3654
#3653

The previous decision was to do nothing because some maintainers had not-so-good experience with similar solutions. I'm not sold one way or another and cspell seems not too noisy.

I see that you needed to put lots of exceptions in .github/workflows/cspell.json. Is it something that was tedious? Do you think that it will be a burden to maintain over time? Overall it could be a topic for the next office hours :)

We had a discussion in the past on the topic #3654 #3653

The previous decision was to do nothing because some maintainers had not-so-good experience with similar solutions. I'm not sold one way or another and cspell seems not too noisy.

I see that you needed to put lots of exceptions in .github/workflows/cspell.json. Is it something that was tedious? Do you think that it will be a burden to maintain over time? Overall it could be a topic for the next office hours :)

it was a bit tedious, but at the same time the errors it gave at first pretty much wrote the list of words to add to cspell.json, and then was just a question of reviewing those how seemed typos or words to the list. And honestly once is done probably will just require adding some words from time to time.

But I can add this pr to discussion for the next office hours.

Thanks! To reiterate, I'm favorably impressed how the tool caught a lot of misspells (with your help too of course) but it would be good to hear from other maintainers before committing.

As promised, we've discussed during the office hours with @heliapb and @yp969803. The conclusion is that we're going to try it and see if it brings value. Because it's not a required check and it only works on Markdown files, it shouldn't be noisy.

It is also reviewing yaml|yml as per files: "**/*.{md,yaml,yml}" - but I left it as that since yaml docs are updated from make so I think it should not be to hard to managed. Also for reference open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#12671