test: Add basic integration test and ci setup

[rlinehan]

Part of #3.

This adds a super basic happy path integration test using the unittest package. A new CI GitHub Action runs the tests on every pull request and on pushes to main.

[rlinehan]

@gautamomento Might want to chat with you about organization of the workflows in this repo - I'm not 100% sure if we need the On pull request and On push workflows; it might be better to organize as like CI and build or something like that? But not something that needs to be done in this PR, IMO.

[gautamomento]

@gautamomento Might want to chat with you about organization of the workflows in this repo - I'm not 100% sure if we need the On pull request and On push workflows; it might be better to organize as like CI and build or something like that? But not something that needs to be done in this PR, IMO.

Yea sure thing lets chat about this.

[gautamomento]

The code looks good. But would like to better understand new ci.yml vs modifying existing. So, lets sync up on that.

Accidentally clicked approve, wanted to comment instead.

[rlinehan]

The code looks good. But would like to better understand new ci.yml vs modifying existing. So, lets sync up on that.

Yeah, to summarize my thoughts - the existing workflows are push_request and pull_request and are organized by what we should do for pushes vs. pull requests. But I think something like running tests we want to happen in both of those cases - on all prs and on at least pushes to main.

I think its more logical to group by type of thing the workflow is doing, similar to how the java sdk has ci.yml and cd.yml - so a workflow for running tests and a workflow for building and pushing the package.

[gautamomento]

Yeah, to summarize my thoughts - the existing workflows are push_request and pull_request and are organized by what we should do for pushes vs. pull requests. But I think something like running tests we want to happen in both of those cases - on all prs and on at least pushes to main.

Aha thank you. Like this.

[rlinehan]

@gautamomento my thinking was add ci.yml in this pr, and then in another can refactor the other two existing workflows to be more like what I described?

[gautamomento]

@gautamomento my thinking was add ci.yml in this pr, and then in another can refactor the other two existing workflows to be more like what I described?

That sounds reasonable. Please add an issue here so we don't miss it.

[rlinehan]

That sounds reasonable. Please add an issue here so we don't miss it.

Added #19