Fixed .editorconfig and added validation to workflows

[Belonit]

We use this workflow at Phobos and it works well

[Rans4ckeR]

FYI we are planning to merge below PR before all others, which will generate quite some conflicts I'm afraid.

• https://github.com/CnCNet/xna-cncnet-client/pull/341

[Metadorius]

I think it would be beneficial if you reset your branch to pre-fix and then reapply all warning fixes.

[Belonit]

@Metadorius Yes, I'll do it a little later

[Belonit]

I updated this PR and consider it is done

[github-actions[bot]]

Nightly build for this pull request:

• artifacts.zip This comment is automatic and is meant to allow guests to get latest automatic builds without registering. It is updated on every successful build.

[Belonit]

The council ™️ concluded that the style checks should absolutely NOT fail a workflow. Instead look into making a problem matcher and registering it so that it displays issues as inline annotations (same applies for Phobos one as it's quite annoying to get failed runs just because of a stray trailing space): https://github.com/actions/toolkit/blob/main/docs/problem-matchers.md

Currently, GitHub Actions limit the annotation count in a workflow run.

• 10 warning annotations, 10 error annotations, and 10 notice annotations per step
• 50 annotations per job (sum of annotations from all the steps)
• 50 annotations per run (separate from the job annotations, these annotations aren’t created by users)

If your workflow may exceed these annotation counts, consider filtering of the log messages which the Problem Matcher is exposed to (e.g. by PR touched files, lines, or other).

[Metadorius]

I think those counts are reasonable and we can work with that. Not sure why you closed the PR though?

[Belonit]

I think those counts are reasonable and we can work with that. Not sure why you closed the PR though?

I'm not sure why it closed either. Possibly missclick