Check LFS cache size before skipping download

[atharva-2001]

📝 Description

Type: 🪲 bugfix | 🚀 feature | ☣️ breaking change | 🚦 testing | 📝 documentation | 🎢 infrastructure

For some reason, the total LFS data is sometimes not cached. The workflow works fine but no LFS objects are retrieved from the cache- failing tests.
Example of failed tests(look at the "restore LFS cache" step)- https://github.com/tardis-sn/tardis/actions/runs/5812754802/job/15758824543?pr=2385

📌 Resources

Examples, notebooks, and links to useful references.

🚦 Testing

How did you test these changes?

• Testing pipeline
• Other method (describe)
• My changes can't be tested (explain why)

☑️ Checklist

• I requested two reviewers for this pull request
• I updated the documentation according to my changes
• I built the documentation by applying the build_docs label

Note: If you are not allowed to perform any of these actions, ping (@) a contributor.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2387 (f7f6adc) into master (44b2f47) will increase coverage by 0.13%.
Report is 3 commits behind head on master.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

❗ Current head f7f6adc differs from pull request most recent head 4b19581. Consider uploading reports for the commit 4b19581 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2387      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   68.50%   68.64%   +0.13%     
==========================================
  Files         144      145       +1     
  Lines       13264    13251      -13     
==========================================
+ Hits         9087     9096       +9     
+ Misses       4177     4155      -22     

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
...s/montecarlo/montecarlo_numba/tests/test_packet.py	97.50% <ø> (-0.20%)	⬇️
tardis/montecarlo/tests/test_montecarlo.py	29.38% <ø> (-0.77%)	⬇️
tardis/transport/tests/test_doppler_factor.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

[atharva-2001]

The problem hasn't appeared in a while- the PR is safe to close I guess