sdk include/exclude logic

[iwahbe]

This PR extends the sdk option to support intuitive include/exclude logic for which packages to publish.

This change is fully backwards compatible.

The motivator is a fix for pulumi/pulumi-local#1 that doesn't require naming all languages to publish.

My hope is that non-pulumi users can also use this to clean up their publish scripts.

---

This has been tested as part of https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi-local/actions/runs/7339080823/job/19982930394. We can see that java, node and .NET published but python did not.

[t0yv0]

🤯

This is good to go but let's not make too many more changes like this on top of this one or else we'll end up needing a SAT solver to understand what's going on. I fully appreciate that GHA have limited abstraction capacity so this may be needed...

[iwahbe]

We don't need a SAT solver... but I did build this to verify the logic:

def contains(haystack: str, needle: str) -> bool:
    return needle in haystack

class input:
    def __init__(self, sdk):
        self.sdk = sdk

def check(query: str, sdk: str) -> bool:
    inputs = input(sdk)
    return eval(query.replace("||", "or").replace("&&", "and").replace(" !", " not "))

check("(contains(inputs.sdk, 'nodejs') || (contains(inputs.sdk, 'all') && !contains(inputs.sdk, '!all'))) && !contains(inputs.sdk, '!nodejs')", "!all")

We've shot ourselves in the foot several times with arrays vs strings through composite actions. It seems like everything is stringly typed given enough transformations. I don't think we will need to make any more changes here. 🤞

I might be able to refactor so the check only needs to show up once per language.

[guineveresaenger]

I really like the refactor into separate language composites on principle. 👍

I also think using a comma-separated list is a UX improvement for users, and the updated documentation is fabulous.

However, while they clearly work, I am not super comfortable with the string checks using the ! character in its string form; and the order of logic operations also feels a bit brittle from a maintainer perspective (again, thank you for the excellent comment in the code).

Could it not be also acceptable to provide documentation for using strategy.matrix and using matrix.language under with.sdk?

It's somewhat six of one and half a dozen of the other, just thought I'd throw it out there that we have options for using the current form of the code.

[guineveresaenger]

non-blocking: probably will want to remove the explicit version tagging here and elsewhere, or use @main

[iwahbe]

Could it not be also acceptable to provide documentation for using strategy.matrix and using matrix.language under with.sdk?

It's somewhat six of one and half a dozen of the other, just thought I'd throw it out there that we have options for using the current form of the code.

I'm trying to allow opting out of a specific language, without needing to name all other languages. Otherwise, I would agree that using matrix would be equivalent (and simpler for us to maintain).

[iwahbe]

Factoring out each language cleanly is impossible because of actions/runner#895. I'm trying a workaround: e0cb8d5.

[iwahbe]

I have the factored version working 🎉 (example).