chore(ci): Upgrade workflows to non-deprecated runtimes

[dev-slatto]

Description of the issue

Hi! 👋🏻

Several of the Github Actions in the repo is using deprecated runtimes for its workflows.

Description of changes

How does this change address the problem?
I've upgraded the deprecated actions to versions that uses non-deprecated runtimes.

Note that setup-go@v4 will try to enable caching unless the cache input is explicitly set to false. I'll be more than happy to make it false if wanted as I see that you already do a lot of cache in the different pipelines.

Open to feedback if there are any other changes wanted done regarding Github Actions 😄

License

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

Tests

Describe what tests you have done.

Requirements

Before commit the code, please do the following steps.

1. Run make fmt and make fmt-sh
2. Run make linter

[khanhntd]

Hi @dev-slatto ,
Thanks for the contribution and your PR contains all the PR from dependandot (e.g stale) so thanks for that, this would help us a lot though.

[dev-slatto]

No worries! For the sake of it and to clean up the PR overview I'll add here what this one closes 😄

Closes #709 #708 #707 #706 #705

[khanhntd]

Hi @dev-slatto ,
The PR look good to me and there are no concern over it (but no PM is needed for the changes too so good news) when looking the breaking changes of all the Github Action. (including the slate action). I agree with you regarding adding cache in setup@v4. Even though I saw its mentioned regarding use the key with the hash of go sum, I have not seen whether it can applied to cache with different OS. Therefore, if you upgrading it, then we can use the PR workflow to validate it.

No worries! For the sake of it and to clean up the PR overview I'll add here what this one closes 😄

It will automatically close the PR with dependandot when its checking the Github workflow Github action version but its good to link it too

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #719 (96cbd8f) into main (32d78d1) will decrease coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #719      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   56.98%   56.95%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         375      375              
  Lines       17878    17878              
==========================================
- Hits        10187    10182       -5     
- Misses       7092     7095       +3     
- Partials      599      601       +2     

see 2 files with indirect coverage changes

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

[dev-slatto]

Cool stuff @khanhntd! Do you need anything else from me to this PR or does it look good? 😄
I see that one test is failing, but it looks like it's related to some bad creds in a EC2 rather than the changes in this PR.

[khanhntd]

Yes @dev-slatto , can you help us trying setup-go@v4 with cache turning on and deleting the actions/cache@v3 to see if the cache from setup-go@v4 will be good with various OS? Agree with the mac-os are credentials thing so you can ignore it, we have aware of the issue and make an attempt to fix it.

[dev-slatto]

Hey again @khanhntd 👋🏻
Latest commit should let the setup-go@v4 workflow handle dependency cache in the workflows.

[khanhntd]

Re-run the workflow to confirm cache is working. In the mean time, you can also fix the merge conflicts.

[khanhntd]

For all cached hmm

Warning: Restore cache failed: Some specified paths were not resolved, unable to cache dependencies.

[dev-slatto]

@khanhntd After what I've read it looks like the cache-dependency-path actually needs to reference the go.sum file generated for the cache to work. Do we know all of these paths or would we like to then keep the old cache that supports referencing paths instead of the sum files?

[khanhntd]

Do we know all of these paths or would we like to then keep the old cache that supports referencing paths instead of the sum files?

We might not know. There are no examples in Github that's shows anyone is using it so its being a blind spot even for us here. However, if that's the case, we can go with the path turn off the cache and use old cache that referencing paths

[dev-slatto]

@khanhntd then the conflict should be resolved and the dedicated cache step should be implemented again 😄

[khanhntd]

Only 1 small comment before approving it !!!!! Thanks for spending your effort on this !!!

[dev-slatto]

All done @khanhntd! 😄
Thanks for taking the time and giving the feedback!

[khanhntd]

LGTM. Thanks for the contribution !!! Will get another person to review your PR !!

[github-actions]

This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity.

[williazz]

thanks for your contribution!