fixed: added regex validation for version name formatting

[jersey1dev]

Description

[comment]: Propose fix to issue #1781

Fixes #1781

Type of change

• [X ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

Checklist:

Ran relevant checks

• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• My changes generate no new warnings
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
• Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

[dadiorchen]

This looks good, @1nzexi did you try to run it?

[jersey1dev]

Yes, I did. But to be honest, I just manually provided git tags such as v2.9.3 which the CI rejects and tags such as 2.9.3 which the CI currently accepts. But obviously, this test isn't robust. Do you need me write more comprehensive tests? If so, where can I add code for them? Or are there more requirements to the version number than just rejecting version number that precedes with v?

[dadiorchen]

@1nzexi this is enough, we don't have good way to write test for ci / actions, so manually test is the only way I can imagine, also you can bring suggestion on how to test CI

[jersey1dev]

@1nzexi this is enough, we don't have good way to write test for ci / actions, so manually test is the only way I can imagine, also you can bring suggestion on how to test CI

I could try using a repo called act, which has the capabiity of running actions locally and see if it brings any benefits to testing github action scripts. But I do think it is just a convenience utility which allows developers to run github actions locally, instead of being a testing framework for actions.

[github-actions]

🎉 This PR is included in version 2.9.6 🎉

The release is available on GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀