Why do we need both typos and codespell? I thought the idea of typos was that it ignores unknown words, so we don't have to maintain a big list of exceptions. While for codespell we have to maintain a list of exceptions.

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 73.06%. Comparing base (d02da5d) to head (f47d6bd).
Report is 2 commits behind head on develop.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #2104      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    72.82%   73.06%   +0.24%     
===========================================
  Files          357      360       +3     
  Lines        14729    14805      +76     
  Branches      7479     7518      +39     
===========================================
+ Hits         10726    10818      +92     
+ Misses        1976     1950      -26     
- Partials      2027     2037      +10     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Why do we need both typos and codespell? I thought the idea of typos was that it ignores unknown words, so we don't have to maintain a big list of exceptions. While for codespell we have to maintain a list of exceptions.

I am adding codespell, because apparently typos is not fixing all the problems present in the codespell. I'm pretty sure it's true the other way around as well.

We actually maintain similar list for typos as well: https://github.com/XRPLF/clio/blob/develop/_typos.toml

And, it's not that big :)