feat: add delete-branch action

[bethesque]

I have a few questions about how this works @YOU54F

• The actions don't accept a password, but most of these work for the Pact Broker as well as Pactflow. Is there any reason to not support a password?
• Why is the validation for the command inputs duplicated in the .sh files?
• Is there a constraint to hardcode the tag to :latest? This seems a bit dangerous, and counter to the best practice we suggest for all dependencies, which is to pin them. Could we allow the tag as an input to the step?

[YOU54F]

The actions don't accept a password, but most of these work for the Pact Broker as well as Pactflow. Is there any reason to not support a password?

Correcto! The initial action was created by a contributor, and was for the Provider contract publishing which is PactFlow only. It has since been extended to include additional commands supported by both the OSS and PactFlow brokers.

There is no reason now, at least for other commands, to not support Basic and Token based authorization, so I would be happy for these to be updated.

However to avoid maintenance effort in needing to create multiple actions, I prefer to use the full cli directly as an single action, which can support anything exposed by the CLI - https://github.com/pactflow/actions/blob/main/action.yml

This standard action uses a cli.sh file, which can accept a PACT_CLI_VERSION

actions/cli.sh

Line 8 in 19633d2

# Usage: (install fixed version) - pass PACT_CLI_VERSION=v<PACT_CLI_VERSION> eg PACT_CLI_VERSION=v1.92.0 or set as an env var

Why is the validation for the command inputs duplicated in the .sh files?

Legacy reasons - 7f3a1a4

Are you suggesting we just use the validation directly the CLI tool itself? Maybe the error messages wouldn't be as useful for the user, as it may say consumer version doesn't exist, but its called VERSION as part of an action.

Is there a constraint to hardcode the tag to :latest? This seems a bit dangerous, and counter to the best practice we suggest for all dependencies, which is to pin them. Could we allow the tag as an input to the step?

Yes, tag as an input to the step is a good idea, however we probably just want to be clear for a particular action, as which tag it exists from (for example the delete-branch will only exist in versions greater than https://hub.docker.com/layers/pactfoundation/pact-cli/0.56.0.4/images/sha256-55b6b7c210d0a2a34fa38f2de69f4b7f013c6d09e5e2cce2e76a22e000cf2c9b?context=explore)

note: we still need to release pact_broker-client with the delete-branch command in 👍🏾

[YOU54F]

Tested this out here and looks good

Actions - https://github.com/YOU54F/pact-cli-action/actions/workflows/del_bra_act.yml?query=branch%3Adel_bra_act

Workflow - https://github.com/YOU54F/pact-cli-action/blob/del_bra_act/.github/workflows/del_bra_act.yml