[Tooling] fix: changelog verification workflow

[bryanchriswhite]

Description

While recent update to changelog verification works as expected when run locally, it seems to consistently return a false positive result when running in GitHub actions. Testing @h5law's hypothesis (i.e. maybe HEAD or main aren't what we expect them to be in that environment). TLDR; we probably shouldn't rely on git refs in this context.

This PR addresses fixes this false positive scenario as well as cleans up a bit.

Issue

No issue as of time of writing, see: https://discordapp.com/channels/553741558869131266/986789914379186226/1067940783111544952

Type of change

Please mark the relevant option(s):

• New feature, functionality or library
• Bug fix
• Code health or cleanup
• Major breaking change
• Documentation
• Other

List of changes

• Rename pre-push to pre-receive: pre-push conventionally receives 2 arguments (remote and url), which aren't useful for our case; additionally, pre-receive is a better conceptual fit for the purpose it serves
• Receive list of changed files as argument instead of trying to compute in the same script
• Add quotes around changed files variable interpolation

Testing

• make develop_test
• LocalNet w/ all of the steps outlined in the README
• Tested via PR to my fork

Required Checklist

• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have tested my changes using the available tooling
• I have updated the corresponding CHANGELOG

If Applicable Checklist

• I have updated the corresponding README(s); local and/or global
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• I have added, or updated, mermaid.js diagrams in the corresponding README(s)
• I have added, or updated, documentation and mermaid.js diagrams in shared/docs/* if I updated shared/*README(s)

[bryanchriswhite]

I think the following might be more correct but didn't have time to test it this morning:

Suggested change

	BRANCH_CHANGED_FILES=($1)
	BRANCH_CHANGED_FILES=($@)

The concern is that only the first file (in the case of $1) in the space delimited list may be received but I think this may depend on whether the list was quoted or not in the calling context. In contrast $@ will pass all arguments the script receives, in the case where the file list isn't quoted (I think).

[h5law]

"$@" refers to all arguments "$1 will only refer to arg#1 (first filename)

[bryanchriswhite]

Haha, nice timing @h5law! I just edited my comment - I'm on my way out of the house and had to step away for a sec.

[h5law]

When we pass "${{needs.changedfiles.outputs.all}}" what is actually happening is the list of filenames is expanded into this form bash pre-recieve file1 file2 file3 file4 ... so when we do ($@) bash is actually taking all these individual file names and storing them into an array we can loop over. 👍🏼

I think it would be worth looking into the reason why the workflow would not find head as the previous solution was cleaner IMO and would remove the need for the changedfiles workflow aswell.

[h5law]

Looks good to me, I commited the $@ change this refers to all the arguments whereas $1 is only the first.