fzerorubigd/chapar: workers/processor.go; 8 LoC

Found a possible issue in [fzerorubigd/chapar](https://www.github.com/fzerorubigd/chapar) at [workers/processor.go](https://github.com/fzerorubigd/chapar/blob/31bedf3ca11b7436f3be8ae9c6c05ff26e810c86/workers/processor.go#L168-L175)

Below is the message reported by the analyzer for this snippet of code. Beware that the analyzer only reports the first issue it finds, so please do not limit your consideration to the contents of the below message.

> range-loop variable i used in defer or goroutine at line 172

[Click here to see the code in its original context.](https://github.com/fzerorubigd/chapar/blob/31bedf3ca11b7436f3be8ae9c6c05ff26e810c86/workers/processor.go#L168-L175)

Click here to show the 8 line(s) of Go which triggered the analyzer.

```go
for i := range m.workers {
wg.Add(1)
go func() {
// TODO : log err
_ = m.ProcessQueue(ctx, i, opts...)
wg.Done()
}()
}

```

Leave a reaction on this issue to contribute to the project by classifying this instance as a **Bug** :-1:, **Mitigated** :+1:, or **Desirable Behavior** :rocket:
See the descriptions of the classifications [here](https://github.com/github-vet/rangeclosure-findings#how-can-i-help) for more information.

commit ID: 31bedf3ca11b7436f3be8ae9c6c05ff26e810c86

Open workers/processor.go at lines 168-175 and inspect how the range-loop variable i is used inside the goroutine. Compare the analyzer finding with the linked code context, then leave the reaction that classifies the instance; completion is recorded by that classification reaction.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.