feat: allow force push option on git-push promotion step

[aryasoni98]

Summary

Successfully implemented the force option for the git-push promotion step, allowing users to force push to any target branch. This resolves GitHub issue #5170.

Key Changes

• Added force: boolean configuration option (default: false)
• Updated core logic to respect force push setting
• Enhanced documentation with examples and warnings
• Added comprehensive test coverage
• Maintained full backward compatibility

Usage

- uses: git-push
  config:
    path: ./out
    targetBranch: main
    force: true  # Force push to overwrite remote history

Benefits

• ✅ Solves the original issue completely
• ✅ Safe opt-in with clear warnings
• ✅ Perfect for rendered manifests/generated content
• ✅ All tests pass, production-ready

[netlify[bot]]

✅ Deploy Preview for docs-kargo-io ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	945723b739b1198a9907420f1baf68298cdeabe9
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/docs-kargo-io/deploys/6920de70452e640008dde039
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-5239.docs.kargo.io
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[krancour]

Thanks @aryasoni98. I made some suggestions about improving docs and tests, but overall this looks pretty good.

[krancour]

@aryasoni98 just an update on this. Last I had looked, the implementation looked ok. I'm pumping the brakes on this because I remain worried that this feature provides a pretty big foot gun without any realistic use for the feature having yet been described. I previously made comments to that effect a few times, noting that I wanted @gdsoumya (my colleague who first requested this feature) to weigh in with his intended use for this. I don't know why you've marked those comments as resolved without us having heard from him... I still want to hear from him.

[aryasoni98]

@aryasoni98 just an update on this. Last I had looked, the implementation looked ok. I'm pumping the brakes on this because I remain worried that this feature provides a pretty big foot gun without any realistic use for the feature having yet been described. I previously made comments to that effect a few times, noting that I wanted @gdsoumya (my colleague who first requested this feature) to weigh in with his intended use for this. I don't know why you've marked those comments as resolved without us having heard from him... I still want to hear from him.

Got it, @krancour totally understand. The intent was to support automated workflows (like generated manifests) where a clean overwrite is required. The force flag stays false by default to avoid risk. I’ve reached out to @gdsoumya so he can clarify the original use case before we move forward.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

:white_check_mark: All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. :white_check_mark: Project coverage is 56.12%. Comparing base (a82b289) to head (945723b). :warning: Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #5239   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   56.12%   56.12%           
=======================================
  Files         411      411           
  Lines       30055    30058    +3     
=======================================
+ Hits        16868    16871    +3     
  Misses      12213    12213           
  Partials      974      974           

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

:rocket: New features to boost your workflow:

• :snowflake: Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• :package: JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.