docs(issues): add specs for #1786 and #1787, move closed specs to closed/

[josecelano]

Summary

Add issue specs for two follow-up issues opened after merging PR #1784 (Rust edition 2024 migration), and move the now-closed specs to docs/issues/closed/.

Changes

New issue specs

• docs/issues/open/1786-tighten-lint-config.md — spec for migrating lint configuration from scattered RUSTFLAGS / torrust-linting CLI flags to [workspace.lints] in Cargo.toml. Includes investigation of the needless_return = "allow" temporary workaround.
• docs/issues/open/1787-evaluate-msrv-bump.md — spec for evaluating a MSRV bump above 1.85. Currently blocked on Overhaul: packages #1669 (package restructuring) — the extraction scope, naming, and versioning lifecycle of bittorrent-* crates must be settled first.

Closed specs housekeeping

• docs/issues/closed/1778-migrate-to-rust-edition-2024.md — moved from open/; GitHub issue chore: migrate workspace from Rust edition 2021 to edition 2024 #1778 was merged and closed.
• docs/issues/closed/1780-refactor-pre-push-checks-performance-and-verbosity.md — moved from open/; GitHub issue Refactor pre-push checks for output-mode parity and clearer failure feedback #1780 was merged and closed.

Dictionary

• project-words.txt — added callsites (used in the chore: migrate lint configuration to [workspace.lints] in Cargo.toml #1786 spec).

Validation

Pre-push hook passed (machete, linter all, fmt, cargo check, doc build, doc tests, unit tests, E2E tests).

Related issues

Related to #1786
Related to #1787

[josecelano]

ACK 7efcf1f

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR updates issue-spec documentation after the Rust 2024 migration by adding follow-up specs, archiving completed issue specs, and updating the project spelling dictionary.

Changes:

• Adds open specs for lint configuration migration (#1786) and MSRV evaluation (#1787).
• Moves closed issue specs #1778 and #1780 into docs/issues/closed/.
• Adds callsites to the project dictionary.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 5 out of 5 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
project-words.txt	Adds callsites in sorted dictionary position.
docs/issues/open/1786-tighten-lint-config.md	Adds the lint-configuration migration issue spec.
docs/issues/open/1787-evaluate-msrv-bump.md	Adds the blocked MSRV evaluation issue spec.
docs/issues/closed/1778-migrate-to-rust-edition-2024.md	Marks the Rust 2024 migration spec closed and updates its path.
docs/issues/closed/1780-refactor-pre-push-checks-performance-and-verbosity.md	Marks the pre-push refactor spec closed and updates its path.

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (5)

docs/issues/open/1786-tighten-lint-config.md:55

• [workspace.lints] was not available in Cargo 1.64; Cargo manifest lint configuration was stabilized much later (Rust/Cargo 1.74). The project currently has MSRV 1.85, so the planned migration is still viable, but this version statement should be corrected to avoid misleading future MSRV/lint-policy work.

Cargo 1.64+ supports `[workspace.lints]`, the idiomatic way to declare workspace-wide
lint policy in a single, visible, version-controlled location.

docs/issues/open/1786-tighten-lint-config.md:88

• This task adds rust-2024-compatibility, but the current RUSTFLAGS in .cargo/config.toml only include warnings, future-incompatible, let-underscore, nonstandard-style, rust-2018-compatibility, rust-2018-idioms, rust-2021-compatibility, and unused. That contradicts the scope/acceptance criteria that say to migrate the existing set and avoid additional deny-level lint policy changes; either make the new lint group explicitly in scope with rationale or remove it from the task.

| T1  | TODO   | Add `[workspace.lints.rust]` to root `Cargo.toml`                   | Mirrors current RUSTFLAGS entries; `rust-2024-compatibility` added                               |

docs/issues/open/1786-tighten-lint-config.md:103

• The progress log says this spec was drafted and moved to docs/issues/open/, and the next two checkpoints are already checked. Leaving the “Spec drafted” checkpoint unchecked makes the progress tracking internally inconsistent and can confuse the remaining lifecycle state.

- [ ] Spec drafted in `docs/issues/drafts/`
- [x] Spec reviewed and approved by user/maintainer
- [x] GitHub issue created and issue number added to this spec

docs/issues/open/1787-evaluate-msrv-bump.md:115

• The progress log records that the spec was drafted and moved to docs/issues/open/, and the review/issue-creation checkpoints are already checked. Leaving the initial “Spec drafted” checkpoint unchecked makes the lifecycle tracking internally inconsistent.

- [ ] Spec drafted in `docs/issues/drafts/`
- [x] Spec reviewed and approved by user/maintainer
- [x] GitHub issue created and issue number added to this spec

docs/issues/open/1786-tighten-lint-config.md:65

• This scope is missing the required per-package opt-in for Cargo workspace lints. Defining [workspace.lints] in the root manifest only declares inheritable lint settings; each workspace package still needs to inherit them (for example via lints.workspace = true). Without adding that task, removing the existing RUSTFLAGS/CLI denials would leave most workspace members without the intended lint enforcement.

- Add `[workspace.lints.rust]` to the root `Cargo.toml` with the lint groups currently
  expressed as RUSTFLAGS.
- Add `[workspace.lints.clippy]` to the root `Cargo.toml` with the clippy groups
  currently passed by `torrust-linting`, plus `nursery = "warn"` as suggested in the
  PR review.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[josecelano]

ACK 583162b