Add codespell config (to ignore loved "poped") and github workflow to prevent future typos

[yarikoptic]

There were prior runs of codespell committed (e.g. 78f8cad ). But typos would keep appearing unless caught at their inception, which is what this PR proposes to accomplish.

[p12tic]

Let's run on all branches.

[yarikoptic]

Suggested change

branches: [devel]

[yarikoptic]

done locally

[p12tic]

I can't commit this because I would still need to do a rebase to include the change into the commit that introduced .github/workflows/codespell.yml

[yarikoptic]

no need - already done. I just thought first to do while on the phone, hence did suggestions, but then realized that need to get to laptop anyways.

[p12tic]

Let's run on all branches.

[yarikoptic]

Suggested change

branches: [devel]

[yarikoptic]

done locally

[p12tic]

Thanks for the PR. It looks good except in two places and even there the PR was perfect at the time it was created.

[p12tic]

Seems like [[DATALAD RUNCMD] run codespell throughout fixing 1 new typo](https://github.com/containers/podman-compose/pull/755/commits/89f33a04a9decc207a7a66edbddd7f57cd047aa8) could have a cleaner commit message. Most people who will dig in git history don't care what exact tool was used when the change is a spelling fix :)

[yarikoptic]

Ok, I can beg to differ that it is often great to discover what command actually did the change, but that's ok - I will later rewrite that commit and ping here

[p12tic]

great to discover what command actually did the change

I agree, but perhaps a better place would be in CONTRIBUTING.md and/or in error message that would be shown on Github actions logs in case spell check failed.

But that's only if the command is not something arcane that very few people would be using.

[yarikoptic]

great to discover what command actually did the change

I agree, but perhaps a better place would be in CONTRIBUTING.md and/or in error message that would be shown on Github actions logs in case spell check failed.

Sure thing it is good to have clear instructions/documentation. But it is IMHO quite orthogonal to commit messages being descriptive, especially in case of use of some one-off tool, but also if it is some well known tool -- I guess I just like provenance ;-) Of cause in the case here of a single typo -- doesn't really matter much. But anyways -- I simplified commit message. force-pushed

[p12tic]

Thanks a lot!