🌱 Add branch protection evaluation

[AdamKorcz]

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

(Is it a bug fix, feature, docs update, something else?)

• PR title follows the guidelines defined in our pull request documentation

What is the current behavior?

What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?**

• Changes Branch Protection evaluation to process probe findings. Some of the probes were submitted here: 🌱 Add probes for Branch Protection #3691

• Adds another probe

• Rewrites a bunch of tests

• Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes/features)

Which issue(s) this PR fixes

NONE

Special notes for your reviewer

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE
For user-facing changes, please add a concise, human-readable release note to
the release-note

(In particular, describe what changes users might need to make in their
application as a result of this pull request.)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #3759 (f706b69) into main (4ae4ba2) will decrease coverage by 6.76%.
The diff coverage is 76.53%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3759      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   75.36%   68.60%   -6.76%     
==========================================
  Files         232      234       +2     
  Lines       15682    15842     +160     
==========================================
- Hits        11818    10868     -950     
- Misses       3129     4302    +1173     
+ Partials      735      672      -63     

[spencerschrock]

only a partial review (ran out of time before lunch), but wanted to get a few of these questions to you for discussion. Particularly the "protected" branch value/probe discussion

[AdamKorcz]

#3759 (comment) fixed in ba40d03

[AdamKorcz]

The failing integration test looks unrelated, but reliably reproduces:

• [FAILED] [0.487 seconds]
E2E TEST:SearchCommits E2E TEST:SearchCommits [It] Should return commits by dependabot
/home/runner/work/scorecard/scorecard/e2e/searchCommits_test.go:29

  [FAILED] Expected
      <int>: 0
  to be >
      <int>: 0
  In [It] at: /home/runner/work/scorecard/scorecard/e2e/searchCommits_test.go:37 @ 01/09/24 17:24:45.055

[spencerschrock]

The failing integration test looks unrelated, but reliably reproduces:

I think this had to do with today's GitHub status incident.

[spencerschrock]

@spencerschrock PTAL again.

I'm seeing weird reversions of commits from earlier discussions. For example:

• 75c18eb was (accidentally?) reverted by 00acf66
• 5c98388 was (accidentally?) reverted by e5b1666

And one e2e test is still failing

TOKEN_TYPE=PAT ginkgo --focus-file branch_protection_test.go e2e

[FAILED] branch protection accessible patch: (-expected +actual)  utests.TestReturn{
        Error:         nil,
        Score:         1,
  -     NumberOfWarn:  3,
  +     NumberOfWarn:  6,
        NumberOfInfo:  4,
  -     NumberOfDebug: 4,
  +     NumberOfDebug: 8,
    }

[spencerschrock]

/scdiff generate Branch-Protection

[github-actions]

Here's a link to the scdiff run

[raghavkaul]

93fbbc1-f706b69 LGTM.