Add fail-on-cache-miss option

[cdce8p]

Description

Add an advanced option to fail job if cache miss occurs.
Based on the work from @kotewar which was reverted in 11ab7cc.

Motivation and Context

Fixes #955 and partially #1020 (comment)

This is already possible via the cache-hit output. However, especially for advanced workflows, this quickly becomes cumbersome to add every time. It's also an additional 3 line for each job and doesn't include a good error message.

  - name: Check cache hit
    if: steps.cache.outputs.cache-hit != 'true'
    run: exit 1

As mentioned in #955 (comment), the goal to simplify the configuration doesn't exclude the possibility to help with more advanced use cases. Including the new option will make it easier to use, help keep workflows more readable, and enable better error messages.

How Has This Been Tested?

Added test cases and run a test workflow using the feature branch.

Screenshots (if appropriate):

--

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• Documentation (add or update README or docs)

Checklist:

• My code follows the code style of this project.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

[cdce8p]

@kotewar I rebased all my PRs to resolve the merge conflicts and update the tests after the recent changes. Is there a timeline when this can move forward? It would be awesome if I wouldn't have to resolve merge conflicts every other week.

[kotewar]

Looks good to me, before we can release this out, we need a few additions

1. Please update the patch version in package.json
2. Please update RELEASES.md and the Whats new section of README.md with appropriate release info.

I'll approve, merge the PR and release the new version once the info is updated! Thanks :)

[kotewar]

Whats new section of README.md with appropriate release info.

This also please. Just one liner is enough.

[cdce8p]

Whats new section of README.md with appropriate release info.

This also please. Just one liner is enough.

Sorry. Missed that the first time. Should be good now.

[kotewar]

LGTM

[kotewar]

Thanks @cdce8p for your contribution, the changes are live 🚀

Please do test the positive and negative responses once with the latest tag actions/cache@v3 and actions/cache/restore@v3.

[cdce8p]

Thanks @cdce8p for your contribution, the changes are live 🚀

Awesome 🎉 Thanks for your help getting it ready.

Please do test the positive and negative responses once with the latest tag actions/cache@v3 and actions/cache/restore@v3.

actions/cache@v3.2.4 does seem to work as expected from my initial testing. However, the v3 tag doesn't seem to have been updated. It still points to 3.2.3 (58c146c) not 3.2.4 (58c146c).
Thus I just get Unexpected input(s) 'fail-on-cache-miss' for that.

[kotewar]

Let me check

[kotewar]

My bad, I forgot to tag the version to v3. Please check now.

[cdce8p]

My bad, I forgot to tag the version to v3. Please check now.

It works now! Thanks