[MRG] Add basic GitHub Actions workflow for testing

[betatim]

This PR will reimplement our Travis testing setup on GitHub Actions. The goal is to retire Travis as quickly as possible and use only GitHub Actions.

Heavily based on https://github.com/manics/zero-to-jupyterhub-k8s/blob/gh-workflow/.github/workflows/test.yml

[consideRatio]

Here is an extract from the recent pebble-helm-chart migration I attempted. I wanted to highlight the on failure/on success steps. I suggest we add a step running the full_namespace_report function on failure.

      - name: Run tests
        run: |
          helm lint pebble --values ci/ci-values.yaml
          helm lint pebble --strict --values ci/ci-values.yaml
          helm template pebble ./pebble --values ci/ci-values.yaml --validate
          helm install pebble ./pebble --values ci/ci-values.yaml --wait --timeout 60s
          helm test pebble
      - name: Emit report on success
        if: success()
        run: |
          kubectl get all --all-namespaces
      - name: Emit report on failure
        if: failure()
        run: |
          kubectl get all --all-namespaces
          kubectl logs pebble-test --all-containers --prefix
          kubectl logs pebble-coredns-test --all-containers --prefix
          kubectl logs deploy/pebble-coredns --all-containers --prefix

[consideRatio]

I'm not 100%, but I think we may want to set hub_url_local: http://hub:8001

Since this is a configuration for binderhub the Helm chart, then I think that's fine, because then we can set hub_url to be the public url no matter if that URL is something that the binderhub pod within the k8s cluster can reach or not, because the binderhub pod will always rely on the hub_url_local over the hub_url (public) if it is set.

[consideRatio]

@betatim I added two commits to make the chart publishing work with GitHub actions, but there is one part missing still about DOCKER_USERNAME and DOCKER_PASSWORD. I hope that Min can help us with this and I have already pinged him to do this for z2jh and binderhub. See the concrete request in gitter if you happen to have the password for the dockerhub user jupyterhubbot

[betatim]

Ah, sorry I didn't see your commits before I force pushed. I'll integrate those things again later.

[consideRatio]

@betatim no worries, I created a PR for it as i still had them locally: betatim#2

[betatim]

edit: seems like I need to get better at parsing regex in my head. Ignore comment below.

---

A bit puzzled why the tests fail. Or to put it differently: I am confused why this test ever passed. This is because when I run the code that the test exercises locally (with the same input) it raises an exception much earlier than where things go wrong in the test. Reading the code I expect what I see when I run the code in ipython. The output from the test:

_____________________________ test_hydroshare_doi ______________________________

    async def test_hydroshare_doi():
        spec = '10.4211/hs.b8f6eae9d89241cf8b5904033460af61'
    
        provider = HydroshareProvider(spec=spec)
    
>       ref = await provider.get_resolved_ref()

binderhub/tests/test_repoproviders.py:134: 
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 
/opt/hostedtoolcache/Python/3.8.6/x64/lib/python3.8/site-packages/tornado/gen.py:742: in run
    yielded = self.gen.throw(*exc_info)  # type: ignore
binderhub/repoproviders.py:374: in get_resolved_ref
    r = yield client.fetch(req)
/opt/hostedtoolcache/Python/3.8.6/x64/lib/python3.8/site-packages/tornado/gen.py:735: in run
    value = future.result()
binderhub/tests/utils.py:79: in fetch
    self._record_response(url_key, response)

The code in question is: https://github.com/jupyterhub/binderhub/blob/master/binderhub/repoproviders.py#L371-L374 which I would expect to fail when calling self._parse_resource_id(self.spec) when spec = "10.4211/hs.b8f6eae9d89241cf8b5904033460af61".

So somewhere that DOI is being resolved that I can't spot :-/

[betatim]

#1209 (comment) was a flakey test maybe or a short downtime of Hydroshare? Locally I got the same error because I misspelt the argument specc= not spec=, I think.

[betatim]

I've incorporated Erik's PR with changes for publishing the chart. I've not tested them/know too little about that to know if they will work or not though. Would be good for someone to take a look at them.

[betatim]

I think this is ready for reviewing. Maybe @minrk can take a look over.

I think there are a few more things we could do (like fix the code scanning) but I'd address those in a new PR because there are PRs with actual content that are waiting to have working CI again. The most important thing to check once we have this merged is if the publishing of the chart works (so that henchbot and mybinder.org deploys can resume).

[consideRatio]

Wieee, @betatim do you also get that nice feeling? ;D

[betatim]

I get the feeling that we had to invest a lot of hours to get back to where we were before :D

[consideRatio]

Wieee! With my own LGTM and the [MRG] title update and all comments resolved etc its time for a merge I think!

Let's see if things work as they are intended!

[consideRatio]

Publish workflow run failed: https://github.com/jupyterhub/binderhub/actions/runs/361986200

Test workflow run seems to succeed: https://github.com/jupyterhub/binderhub/actions/runs/361986201