Don't forcefully validate Git repos if not needed

[ferrarimarco]

Fixes #4952

Proposed Changes

1. Add a test case to run super-linter against a subdirectory after setting USE_FIND_ALGORITHM=true.
2. Move the configuration of git safe.directory after we set GITHUB_WORKSPACE, and not before because GITHUB_WORKSPACE might be initialized when running locally.
3. Validate variables before validating the Git repository, so that we get those variables initialized correctly before using them.
4. Validate the Git directory regardless of the value of VALIDATE_ALL_CODEBASE because we need a valid Git repository and references both when VALIDATE_ALL_CODEBASE=true and when VALIDATE_ALL_CODEBASE=false.
5. Validate the Git directory when USE_FIND_ALGORITHM == false, not when USE_FIND_ALGORITHM != false.
6. Initialize GITHUB_SHA when running locally and when USE_FIND_ALGORITHM == false.
7. Fail with a fatal error if we can't add the workspace to the list of safe Git directories.
8. Fix log level color markers for non-default cases.
9. Set DEFAULT_BRANCH when running tests.

Readiness Checklist

Author/Contributor

• I included all the needed documentation for this change.
• I provided the necessary tests.

Reviewing Maintainer

• Label as breaking if this is a large, fundamental change.
• Label as either: automation, bug, documentation, enhancement, infrastructure.

BEGIN_COMMIT_OVERRIDE
fix: don't forcefully validate Git repos if not needed (#4953)
END_COMMIT_OVERRIDE

[rmatte]

When I look at the commit for this it only appears to include the code for "2. Add a workflow step to catch this issue."

[ferrarimarco]

When I look at the commit for this it only appears to include the code for "2. Add a workflow step to catch this issue."

Yep. As I explained in #4952, I'd like to see a failing workflow, that we'll fix by committing the change you suggested. :)

This helps us validate the fix, and may help catching this or similar issues in the future.

[rmatte]

When I look at the commit for this it only appears to include the code for "2. Add a workflow step to catch this issue."

Yep. As I explained in #4952, I'd like to see a failing workflow, that we'll fix by committing the change you suggested. :)

This helps us validate the fix, and may help catching this or similar issues in the future.

Gotcha, thanks.

[kftsehk]

Had another local run issue #4954 related to the same pr #4889

So I added ci/cd tests for all non-default general super-linter behavior settings, in the hope to test local run more rigorously for blocking bugs, see PR #4955

[zkoppert]

👍🏻