Actions are changed from default branch to version-specified.

[taku333]

Summary

The default branch named reviewdog was specified, so it was changed to the version specification.
It is expected to be resistant to errata-ai/vale-action changes.

[welcome]

💖 Thanks for opening this pull request! 💖 The InnerSource Commons community really appreciates your time and effort to contribute to the project. Please make sure you have read our Contributing Guidelines.

If you are submitting a new pattern, the following things will help get your pull request across the finish line! 🏁

• Confirm that you have used our pattern template. Please remove any placeholder text and sections that your pattern did not need.
• We run a number of automated checks on your PR. Please review the output of those checks on the PR itself, and see if any issues got flagged that you can fix yourself.
• Make sure you have added your new pattern to the list of patterns in the main README.md. If you are unsure where to add your pattern, just let us know by commenting on your PR and we will help you.

This project has a small number of maintainers, volunteering their time to this project. So please be patient and we will get back to you as soon as we can. If we don't acknowledge this pull request after 7 days, feel free to chat to us about it in our Slack workspace.

[spier]

Thanks for this @taku333!

Back when we introduced this Action it was recommended to use the version tagged reviewdog. However that seems to have changed in the meantime, based on the docs. So sounds like a good idea to switch!

Some questions about the implementation:

1. Your PR suggests to just fix the major version, right? i.e. if vale-action upgrades to 2.1.2 or 2.2.x ... we would still pick these up, as with errata-ai/vale-action@v2 we would only fix the major version, right?
2. When reading the docs I noticed that you can also fix the version of vale itself. Currently we are using the default, which means that we will always pull the latest version of vale (currently 3.9.1). What's your take, should we fix the vale version as well?

And last but not least, just out of curiosity:
How did you come across this repo? Are you part of the InnerSource community in Japan?

In either case, thanks a lot for identifying this issue and for helping to keep our repo stable :)

[taku333]

@spier

Thanks for your reply!

Your PR suggests to just fix the major version, right? i.e. if vale-action upgrades to 2.1.2 or 2.2.x ... we would still pick these up, as with errata-ai/vale-action@v2 we would only fix the major version, right?

I believe that if the vale-action tag is managed, upgrades below minor will be reflected automatically.

When reading the docs I noticed that you can also fix the version of vale itself. Currently we are using the default, which means that we will always pull the latest version of vale (currently 3.9.1). What's your take, should we fix the vale version as well?

It may also be necessary to modify the vale-actions.
In that case, I need to modify it again. Shall I prepare the Actions dependabot.yml on my end to automate it?
Then, in the future, when a major version is upgraded, a pull request will be sent from dependabot.

How did you come across this repo? Are you part of the InnerSource community in Japan?

I am not a member of the community.

I found the following book and arrived here.
https://x.com/yuhattor/status/1830489532351107550

I am reading this to see if we can spread the InnerSource culture within the company as much as possible.

[spier]

Actually for now let's just go with your current PR.

We have not really had any issues with vale-action or vale in the past, so probably your change in this PR is already making this stable enough.

Thanks again for finding and fixing this!

[welcome]

Congrats on merging your first pull request! 🎉 We here at The InnerSource Commons are proud of you! 💖 Thank you so much for your contribution 🎁

[spier]

How did you come across this repo? Are you part of the InnerSource community in Japan?

I am not a member of the community.

I found the following book and arrived here. https://x.com/yuhattor/status/1830489532351107550

I am reading this to see if we can spread the InnerSource culture within the company as much as possible.

@taku333 one more thing: If you like, you can join our Slack.

There you can find @yuhattor and other folks interested in InnerSource. There is also a channel dedicated to the InnerSource community in Japan, if that should be interesting for you.

Thanks again for the contribution and the nice chat :)