Add dashboard providing obsolete action information

[XxshiftxX]

• Add option on action command to provide obsolete action data as json format to dashboard.
  • .Lib9c.Tools/SubCommand/Action.cs
• Add gh-action workflow generating json data with action command
  • .github/*
• Add dashboard providing obsolete action information
  • Dashboard/*

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[moreal]

I will leave an additional review

[moreal]

🚀🚀🚀 🙏🏻

[moreal]

You should rebase this branch and you can merge this pull request 🙏🏻

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 340 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Large
Size       : +328 -12
Percentile : 74%

Total files changed: 20

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +33 -12
.yml : +37 -0
.example : +2 -0
.cjs : +15 -0
.gitignore : +23 -0
.js : +14 -0
.md : +8 -0
.html : +13 -0
.json : +59 -0
.tsx : +74 -0
.css : +42 -0
.ts : +8 -0
.lock : +0 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.