Update hendrikmuhs/ccache-action action to v1.0.5

[renovate]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Type	Update	Change
hendrikmuhs/ccache-action	action	patch	v1.0.2 -> v1.0.5
hendrikmuhs/ccache-action	action	patch	v1.0.4 -> v1.0.5

---

Release Notes

hendrikmuhs/ccache-action

v1.0.5

Compare Source

v1.0.4

Compare Source

always store the cache

v1.0.3

Compare Source

make cache size configurable, don't call apt-get update

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 Automerge: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied.

♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about these updates again.

---

• If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box.

---

This PR has been generated by WhiteSource Renovate. View repository job log here.

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 24 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +12 -12
Percentile : 9.6%

Total files changed: 12

Change summary by file extension:
.yml : +12 -12

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detetcted.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[vizipi]

Pull request analysis by VIZIPI

Below you will find who is the most qualified team member to review your code.
This analysis includes his/her work on the code included in this Pull request, in addition to their experience in code affected by these changes ( partly found within the list of potential missing files below )   Feedback always welcome

No other active qualified developers found to review these specific changes. You might consider involving more team members with these code segments.

---

Potential missing files from this Pull request

files commonly committed with a subset of this pr, but not committed this time. (click to collapse)

File	Percentile	rate
.github/workflows/Windows-MSVC-ROOT-Geant4.yml	50.00 %	2 out of 4 times
workflow-templates/Windows-MSVC.yml	50.00 %	2 out of 4 times
workflow-templates/Windows-M2sys-ROOT-Geant4.yml	50.00 %	2 out of 4 times
.github/workflows/Windows-MSVC.yml	50.00 %	2 out of 4 times
workflow-templates/Windows-M2sys.yml	50.00 %	2 out of 4 times
.github/workflows/Windows-M2sys-ROOT-Geant4.yml	50.00 %	2 out of 4 times
.github/workflows/Windows-M2sys.yml	50.00 %	2 out of 4 times
workflow-templates/Windows-MSVC-ROOT-Geant4.yml	50.00 %	2 out of 4 times

---

Committed file ranks

(click to expand)

40.00%[workflow-templates/Linux-Clang.yml]

40.00%[.github/workflows/MacOS-Clang-ROOT-Geant4.yml]

40.00%[workflow-templates/MacOS-Clang-ROOT-Geant4.yml]

40.00%[.github/workflows/Linux-Clang.yml]

40.00%[.github/workflows/Linux-GCC-ROOT-Geant4.yml]

40.00%[.github/workflows/Linux-Clang-ROOT-Geant4.yml]

40.00%[workflow-templates/Linux-Clang-ROOT-Geant4.yml]

40.00%[workflow-templates/Linux-GCC.yml]

40.00%[workflow-templates/Linux-GCC-ROOT-Geant4.yml]

40.00%[.github/workflows/MacOS-Clang.yml]