workflow: Update ansible-test CI action and fix detected issues

[marcelmamula]

Premise

CI Action provided by Ansible team must be executed and passing in order to mark our collection as maintained and in good shape.

Changes

• GitHub workflow CI was updated:

  • Triggers updated
  • Comments were added for clarity
  • Ansible and Python matrix updated
  • Split steps into Supported (current versions) and EOL (with continue-on-error: true) to track backwards compatibility without enforcing it.
  • Sanity tests updated:
    • Ansible and Python matrix updated

• ignore files added for current ansible versions and devel.

• Python 2 compatibility was removed

• All detected issues in tests were fixed.

• Readme was updated to reflect tested versions and to note Python 2 compatibility removal.

Tests

Tests were done by CI workflow in question.

• Successful run for supported and EOL https://github.com/sap-linuxlab/community.sap_libs/actions/runs/18001651979

• Successful run for supported versions with EOL Sanity failed https://github.com/sap-linuxlab/community.sap_libs/actions/runs/18001396453/job/51211443590

  • This is expected because of continue-on-error: true

[mariolenz]

Apropos of nothing, how about dropping support for ansible-core < 2.17 and do a new major release? I mean, even 2.16 is already EOL. Incidentally, 2.17 and onward don't support Python 2 at all anymore. This might make some things easier for you.

BTW you might also want to update meta/runtime.yml:

community.sap_libs/meta/runtime.yml

Lines 1 to 2 in 226181d

	---
	requires_ansible: ">=2.9.10"

2.9 is pretty old. But some people might say that dropping 2.9 means a new major version. Hence my suggestion to drop even more old and outdated ansible-core versions while you're at it 😏

Just an idea...

cc @felixfontein

[marcelmamula]

@mariolenz @felixfontein I removed Python 2 from tests and it is in alignment of dropped Python 2 support across our whole SAP LinuxLab project.

If we set minimum at 2.17, then it would still be good to know if older are working.
Do you have any experience with splitting action to run non-EOL and EOL as separate step, where EOL would have continue-on-error: true? It might work to show in future when compatibility breaks.

I will be updating Readme (explain dropped support for pyrfc) and other files as well so it would be bump to 1.5.0 version.

• @berndfinger @rhmk

[berndfinger]

I will be updating Readme (explain dropped support for pyrfc) and other files as well so it would be bump to 1.5.0 version.

• @berndfinger @rhmk

Fine for me, thanks @marcelmamula !

[berndfinger]

LGTM