Update blog dates

[psschwei]

No description provided.

[ajbozarth]

The action looks ok to me, but I still have significant personal hesitation to having an action add a commit during the PR merge process. As I raised in scrum, it just rub me the wrong way process-wise

[ajbozarth]

Also IIUC this would update a blog's date if we ever needed to go in later and make a minor edit

[planetf1]

I share @ajbozarth 's concern about source data mutation during the pipeline.

A few other thoughts

• sometimes we may need to make a correction like to front matter (for search) or fix up a link. I think the date here should reflect the original/intended publication but not necessarily always be updated. We could add a 'last update' date if we do want that - and would have to consider what it means for sorting -- or we can also add modified & published....
• writing within CI also broadens out permissions more generally - and can risk circular PR kick-offs in future - I feel any dates/logs should be stored elsewhere, (perhaps a log file that gets checkin is a maybe, but doesn't fix above).

Another thought - do validation rather than mutation, ie check the date is within X days of today. However this won't help where front matter/fixes are made, unless we also add an opt-out via some comment mechanism or PR tagging

Overally if we don't add more sophistication around data persistence and distinction between data types I would prefer validation/rejection (despite then needing another edit) than mutation.

So I would say I don't agree with the PR as it stands

[planetf1]

disagree with proposal (but will re-review if solution changes)

[psschwei]

The goal here was to avoid having to tweak a date by hand. I don't particularly care how it's done, but there is no good reason not have this automated somehow.