Tested on MacOS with the following config

[workspace.metadata.bevy_lint]
# on by default
correctness = "warn"
suspicious = "warn"
complexity = "warn"
performance = "warn"
# off by default
style = "warn"
restriction = "warn"
pedantic = "warn"

On these Repositories:

bevy:12f71a8936c77735b6f702b1ef849dfc8a306a37
bevy_new_2d:5b4314dc802ac9d09914b4ee4b519334f88f7b3f
janhohenheim/foxtrot:99ec0bbc335e18c11595d548e5ff20c8c6fd9828

Worked as expected with no ICE's

Just out of fun, the Lint output from:

[workspace.metadata.bevy_lint]
#enabled by default
correctness = "warn"
suspicious = "warn"
complexity = "warn"
performance = "warn"
# off by default
style = "warn"
panicking_methods = { level = "warn" }
pedantic = "warn"

lint_output.txt

unconventional_naming needs work. These should be split into distinct lints, so users can pick and choose more easily. The system set convention should also be changed to match the style picked by @Jondolf for Bevy itself :)

We have planned to support configuring the unconventional_naming lint like this in 0.4.0. Would you still rather have one lint per trait?

[package.metadata.bevy_lint]
unconventional_naming = { level = "warn", traits = ["SystemSet", "Plugin"] }

And for the system set convention, we switched to using FooSystems as @Jondolf suggested.

The rest of this looks fine, although main_return_without_appexit confuses me a bit: why should this lint exist, rather than just being a must_use annotation upstream?

I don't know the history, but I think that there were some attempts to do this: bevyengine/bevy#5395, bevyengine/bevy#11947, but that in the end it didn't work, so it sparked the idea for this lint?

And for the system set convention, we switched to using FooSystems as @Jondolf suggested.

Yup! #384 was merged to fix this, but #387 merged at the same time and caused the docs to become outdated. I'll handle that in this PR.

The rest of this looks fine, although main_return_without_appexit confuses me a bit: why should this lint exist, rather than just being a must_use annotation upstream?

I don't know the history, but I think that there were some attempts to do this: bevyengine/bevy#5395, bevyengine/bevy#11947, but that in the end it didn't work, so it sparked the idea for this lint?

Exactly: a lint is configurable, #[must_use] isn't¹. (And Cart pushed back against it, I think he disliked the extra warnings.) The name and implementation could probably be simplified, and it's at most a pedantic warning and not a real issue if people ignore AppExit.

#384 was merged to fix this, but #387 merged at the same time and caused the docs to become outdated.

I take this back, the docs and the implementation look correct. Is there something I'm missing? We decided on SystemSets ending in the suffix "Systems", correct?

Note that the "Test linter action" workflows are meant to fail, as the lint-v0.3.0 tags are not yet created.

#384 was merged to fix this, but #387 merged at the same time and caused the docs to become outdated.

I take this back, the docs and the implementation look correct. Is there something I'm missing? We decided on SystemSets ending in the suffix "Systems", correct?

I ended up looking at the linked PR, so I didn't see any corrections :)

Awesome, thank you so much! I'll merge this later today, once I have time to manage the release :)