Document intended workflow and testing structure

[philnewm]

Is there an existing issue for this?

• I have searched the existing issues.

Please describe the feature you have in mind and explain what the current shortcomings are?

The implementation of github workflows and actions should follow clearly defined rules to allow for conistent development and code quality.
Therefore a docuementation needs to be written about the gerneal structure, testing and security requriments.

Right now anyone could just implement whatever they want however they wont.
The scope of intended easu-to-use customizations also needs to be part of that documentation.

How would you imagine the implementation of the feature?

To ensure this kind of consistency and quality, these points should be defined

• Requirements for repositories to use a certain action
• Requirements, when to implement a workflow
• Requirements, how to implement
  • Primary code language (most likely bash)
  • Code structure best practises
  • Usage of gh vs. git and when to use what
• Requirements, when to implement a dedicated github action
• Usage of python for and in actions
• Testing stages
  • How to local unit-testing
  • How to local integration testing
  • How to github based unit testing
  • How to github based integartion testing
• Define security measuremnts for workflows
• Check for permissions, user access and repo settings in automated way

Are there any labels you wish to add?

• I have added the relevant labels to the feature request.

Describe alternatives you've considered:

Nope

Additional context:

Since actions are supposed to automate tidious developmnet work - these workflows need to be standardized first.
To achive this standardization in a consistent way the requirements need to be defined first.