Go vet and staticcheck with gov1.20.5

[troy0820]

What does this change

Using gov1.20.5, performing go vet ./... and staticcheck ./... produces a number of errors that need to be fixed. This PR fixes them and adjusts the test to not only run the last value in the iteration of tests but maximizes the t.Parallel() with go test -v -race ./...

go vet:

# get.porter.sh/porter/pkg/cnab
pkg/cnab/extensions_test.go:84:38: loop variable supported captured by func literal
pkg/cnab/extensions_test.go:86:21: loop variable supported captured by func literal
pkg/cnab/extensions_test.go:92:38: loop variable supported captured by func literal
pkg/cnab/extensions_test.go:94:21: loop variable supported captured by func literal
# get.porter.sh/porter/pkg/cache
pkg/cache/cache_test.go:174:10: loop variable tc captured by func literal
pkg/cache/cache_test.go:232:10: loop variable tc captured by func literal
# get.porter.sh/porter/pkg/cnab/dependencies/v1
pkg/cnab/dependencies/v1/solver_test.go:86:10: loop variable tc captured by func literal
# get.porter.sh/porter/pkg/cnab/config-adapter
pkg/cnab/config-adapter/adapter_test.go:321:10: loop variable tc captured by func literal
pkg/cnab/config-adapter/adapter_test.go:932:10: loop variable tc captured by func literal
# get.porter.sh/porter/pkg/porter
pkg/porter/parameters_test.go:584:80: loop variable action captured by func literal

staticcheck:

pkg/porter/list_test.go:21:3: this value of i is never used (SA4006)
pkg/porter/list_test.go:42:3: this value of i is never used (SA4006)
pkg/porter/list_test.go:111:2: this value of i is never used (SA4006)

What issue does it fix

Closes #2727

Notes for the reviewer

Put any questions or notes for the reviewer here.

Checklist

• Did you write tests?
  • I had to adjust the tests with the output of go vet ./... and the staticcheck results. The adjustments came to optimize what we need from t.Parallel() so we don't just test the last value in the test cases.
• Did you write documentation?
  • No
• Did you change porter.yaml or a storage document record? Update the corresponding schema file.
• If this is your first pull request, please add your name to the bottom of our Contributors list. Thank you for making Porter better! 🙇‍♀️

Reviewer Checklist

• Comment with /azp run test-porter-release if a magefile or build script was modified
• Comment with /azp run porter-integration if it's a non-trivial PR

[schristoff]

I'll leave it up to the pipeline to yell if this royally upset something, but overall seems great. Thank you for these improvements :)

[schristoff]

Suggested change

	for name, test := range tests {
	test := test
	for name, tc := range tests {
	tc := tc

Minor nit so this is similar with other tests

[troy0820]

This has been updated on the latest push.

[schristoff]

Suggested change

	di := NewDisplayInstallation(install)
	displayinstall := NewDisplayInstallation(install)

I feel like if we make i less ambiguous we should follow the same with di - but open to just leaving it because it is nbd

[troy0820]

This has been updated on the latest push.

[schristoff]

/azp run porter-integration

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

[troy0820]

/azp run porter-integration

[azure-pipelines]

Commenter does not have sufficient privileges for PR 2792 in repo getporter/porter