[as-1069] Add asdf and pre-commit caches

[kevin-dimichel]

Rationale

Aloha would like to speed up our pre-commit and asdf PR checks through caches.

In https://github.com/voxel51/aloha-github-workflows/pull/52 we added two new custom actions for pre-commit and asdf to leverage GitHub caches.

Review Priority

• high
• medium
• low

Changes

• Add a new workflow where on push to the default branch (after PR merges), a cache is generated (which will be used in future Pull Requests when hash of config files is matching)
  • .github/workflows/cache-default-branch.yml
• .github/workflows/asdf-dependabot-update.yml
  • Rename existing steps to summarize actions
  • Add conditional to skip the update-asdf job when matrix is empty ('[]')
• Update existing use(s) of asdf action to use custom action (with cache)
• PR template
  • Include priority

Testing

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto incremental reviews are disabled on this repository.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

• 🔍 Trigger a full review

Walkthrough

The pull request template gains a new "Review Priority" section with three checkbox options—high, medium, and low—enabling contributors to flag their review urgency expectations during submission.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
PR Template Configuration .github/pull_request_template.md	Added "Review Priority" section with three checkbox options (high, medium, low) to allow contributors to indicate desired review urgency

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Poem

🐰 A checkbox here, a checkbox there,
Now prioritize with utmost care!
High, medium, low—the choice is clear,
Reviews will flow throughout the year! ✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The PR title '[as-1069] Add asdf and pre-commit caches' accurately describes the main objective of the changeset, which focuses on implementing caching for asdf and pre-commit to speed up PR checks.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description covers the required sections (Rationale, Changes) with clear details about the implementation. Testing section is incomplete but marked as optional by the template structure.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch kevin/as-1069-asdf-pre-commit-cache

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[afoley587]

I don't think we can use private actions in a public repo

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Fix all issues with AI agents

In @.github/pull_request_template.md:
- Around line 5-10: Change the "Review Priority" section to a proper heading
(e.g., "## Review Priority"), explicitly state that the markdown checkboxes do
not create GitHub labels and instruct contributors to also select the
corresponding priority label from the PR sidebar (or run the repo's labeling
command if automation exists), and add guidance to choose exactly one checkbox
(or mark "none" if not applicable) so the choices are mutually exclusive; update
the copy around the existing checkboxes to reflect this clarified workflow and
mutual-exclusivity requirement.

[coderabbitai]

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 Minor

Clarify the priority selection mechanism and improve formatting.

The instruction states "assign a priority label," but markdown checkboxes don't automatically create GitHub labels. Unless there's automation (not mentioned in the PR description) that reads these checkboxes and assigns actual labels, this instruction may confuse contributors.

Additionally:

• Consider formatting "Review Priority" as a heading (## Review Priority) to match the style of "Rationale" and "Changes"
• The checkboxes don't enforce mutual exclusivity—users could check multiple priorities or none

📝 Suggested improvements

-<!-- Please also assign a priority label to the PR. -->
+<!-- Please select one priority level for this PR. -->
-Review Priority
+## Review Priority

 * [ ] high
 * [ ] medium
 * [ ] low

📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change

	<!-- Please also assign a priority label to the PR. -->
	Review Priority
	* [ ] high
	* [ ] medium
	* [ ] low
	<!-- Please select one priority level for this PR. -->
	## Review Priority
	* [ ] high
	* [ ] medium
	* [ ] low

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

In @.github/pull_request_template.md around lines 5 - 10, Change the "Review
Priority" section to a proper heading (e.g., "## Review Priority"), explicitly
state that the markdown checkboxes do not create GitHub labels and instruct
contributors to also select the corresponding priority label from the PR sidebar
(or run the repo's labeling command if automation exists), and add guidance to
choose exactly one checkbox (or mark "none" if not applicable) so the choices
are mutually exclusive; update the copy around the existing checkboxes to
reflect this clarified workflow and mutual-exclusivity requirement.

[afoley587]

Update!

it looks like there's a workaround