feat: Add subjectPatternError option to set custom sub validation error

[derberg]

• new subjectPatternError to enable custom errors for subject validation failure
• added 2 template values that one can use in the custom error. I think those are needed as not all people understand the difference between title and subject in my opinion
• unit tests added
• manually tested in this PR with such setup taken 1:1 from what I've updated in the readme. Used this commit in test and this is the resulting error check -> https://github.com/derberg/test-experiment/pull/63/checks?check_run_id=1711209860

Resolves #74

[amannn]

Thanks a lot for your work here @derberg!

The new feature seems to work as expected. I hope you found your way around in the code base 🙂.

Good idea with the interpolation of variables – I think this will improve the UX of the error message. Also thanks for adding tests!

I've left some comments with a few nits, but nothing major. Great work 👏.

[derberg]

@amannn hey, fixed applied, please have a look again

[amannn]

Looks good, thanks!

I've unwrapped the tests for formatMessage from the describe block and added another test that verifies we can replace a single variable multiple times.

I'll wait for CI and then release this. Thanks again for your help!

[derberg]

@amannn thanks man, it was a pleasure to contribute. Pure open source, good discussion on the issue, fast communication, great feedback on PR 🙏🏼

I hope you found your way around in the code base

I was only confused with node_modules being part of the code base and default npm install caused some headache. In my actions I just have an approach with compiling action to dist. Anyway, the code base was super good to get along with . We will use this action here for every repo in the organization -> https://github.com/asyncapi/

[amannn]

That's great to hear! 🙂

I was only confused with node_modules being part of the code base

Right, when I created the first version of the action I was a bit confused that this is necessary. I saw that there's an option to compile a binary, but never got around to implementing that. Not sure how complex that really is. Do you have an example where you got that working?

[derberg]

yeah, that is simple, just

1. add this https://github.com/derberg/global-workflows-support/blob/main/package.json#L38 dependency.
2. add script like https://github.com/derberg/global-workflows-support/blob/main/package.json#L9
3. and adjust action.yml https://github.com/derberg/global-workflows-support/blob/main/action.yml#L42
4. remove node_modules from the upstream

normally that is it, but I was always forgetting to build the package 😅 so I have
5. this dependency https://github.com/derberg/global-workflows-support/blob/main/package.json#L43
6. add this script https://github.com/derberg/global-workflows-support/blob/main/package.json#L10
7. configure it https://github.com/derberg/global-workflows-support/blob/main/package.json#L16

I can configure that for you, not a problem, just tell me what you want, all or just the first part?

[amannn]

Thanks for your hints! I took a stab at it in #77. It seems to work 🙂.

Btw. I noticed we forgot to test the positive case when a subjectPatternError is included and I noticed the action always failed when this option was configured. I've fixed this in #79.

[derberg]

I took a stab at it in #77

🥳

Btw. I noticed we forgot to test the positive case when a subjectPatternError is included and I noticed the action always failed when this option was configured. I've fixed this in #79.

ups, sorry for that