ENH: Fix Node.js warnings linked to artifact download GitHub actions

[jhlegarreta]

Fix Node.js warnings linked to artifact download GitHub actions: transition to actions/download-artifact@v3.

Fixes:

python-build-workflow / publish-python-packages-to-pypi
Node.js 12 actions are deprecated. For more information see:
https://github.blog/changelog/2022-09-22-github-actions-all-actions-will-begin-running-on-node16-instead-of-node12/.
Please update the following actions to use Node.js 16: actions/download-artifact@v2

raised for example in:
https://github.com/InsightSoftwareConsortium/ITKTextureFeatures/actions/runs/3832886629

Cross-referencing
actions/download-artifact#134

Left behind in commit 6e81bbd.

[tbirdso]

Thanks for keeping up with this @jhlegarreta.

In the future it would be helpful to test changes via an external module fork to demonstrate that desired functionality is accomplished. I've typically used a development branch in my ITKSplitComponents fork with the latest workflow PR commit hash to verify changes. I will look into documenting that process in this repo.

I am in favor of moving this PR forward without explicit testing because:

• Changes are limited in severity
• The "upload to PyPI" step is difficult to test because it is only expected to run for tagged releases
• I agree with the assessment that the changes will address the warnings in question.

[jhlegarreta]

In the future it would be helpful to test changes via an external module fork to demonstrate that desired functionality is accomplished. I've typically used a development branch in my ITKSplitComponents fork with the latest workflow PR commit hash to verify changes. I will look into documenting that process in this repo

Thanks Tom. The thing with these warnings is that unless one has a look at the action summary page, and scrolls down past the component graph, they still go unnoticed: i.e. the builds themselves are not expect to fail, or warnings/failures be reported in the dashboard. Not sure if there is a way to tell GHA to report a build as failed if actions report warnings.

I've typically used a development branch in my ITKSplitComponents fork with the latest workflow PR commit hash to verify changes

I've seen the effort. Maybe a more sustainable and automated solution could be adopted, maybe with a remote repository that has minimum contents, much like the one the ITKModuleTemplate cookiecutter creates by default.

The "upload to PyPI" step is difficult to test because it is only expected to run for tagged releases

I guess that can be automated and have it tested automatically as well.

But I understand that all of the above may require work and may not be easily done.

[tbirdso]

@jhlegarreta I've opened #48 to track, feel free to add additional discussion on testing there