fix: use local file for sp_whoisactive install

[jkrilov]

Description

Use a local file to install sp_whoisactive during integration tests to avoid 403 error

How Has This Been Tested?

Types of changes

• [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - Fixes #
• [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)

Checklist:

• [x] I have read/followed the CONTRIBUTING document.
• [x] I have read/followed the PR Quick Start Guide
• [x] I have added tests to cover my changes or they are N/A.
• [x] I have added a changelog fragment describing the changes.
• [ ] New module options/parameters include a version_added property.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage has no change and project coverage change: -4.26% :warning:

Comparison is base (9a5a958) 93.80% compared to head (dc9495a) 89.55%.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #169 +/- ## ========================================== - Coverage 93.80% 89.55% -4.26% ========================================== Files 64 52 -12 Lines 2196 1445 -751 ========================================== - Hits 2060 1294 -766 - Misses 136 151 +15 ``` | Flag | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | sanity | `100.00% <ø> (ø)` | | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=John+McCall#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more. [see 15 files with indirect coverage changes](https://app.codecov.io/gh/lowlydba/lowlydba.sqlserver/pull/169/indirect-changes?src=pr&el=tree-more&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=John+McCall)

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[lowlydba]

I'm game to add this as an additional integration test, but want to keep the download option in the tests for sure to get proper end-to-end coverage since that is likely how most people will be using it.

I don't see any issues reported in dbatools about this, or incidents for Github.com so am going to guess it may be transient and will resolve itself soon. It hasn't been a problem before.

[jkrilov]

Fair enough. I'll revert the changes, and add the local file as an additional test.

[lowlydba]

Fair enough. I'll revert the changes, and add the local file as an additional test.

Thanks! I also opened a Github support issue to see if this can get resolved faster that way.

[lowlydba]

This hasn't been a problem for a while, so perhaps how the VMs are allocated, or API throttling has been changed on GitHub's side. I'm going to close for now but feel free to re-open and continue work if it becomes an issue again.