Proposal: Use GitHub Actions for CI/CD

[Brandon-Kimberly]

This issue is in reference to issue 398 posted on the community repository. In this issue, we are proposing that all OpenTelemetry repositories consider using GitHub Actions as their CI provider in order to maintain consistency across the various language repositories.

The overall proposal was discussed in the OpenTelemetry maintainers SIG meeting. @trask has been assigned as the mentor for the project.

Repository	CI Provider	Automated Build and Test	Code Coverage	Automated Performance Testing	Automated Deployment	Automated Docs Deployment
Erlang	CircleCI	[x]	[x]	[x]	[]	[]

The justification and benefits are enumerated in the issue on the community repository and are pasted here as well for convenience:

Proposal

We propose that all languages consider using the same CI provider. This would create a more consistent development process and make it easier for developers to contribute to multiple language libraries.

We suggest that provider be GitHub Actions. Here’s why:

Ease-of-Use

CircleCI will automatically run when pull requests and commits are issued against the repository. But if a contributor forks the repository, unless they set up an account with the CI provider and link it to their forked repository, CI will not be activated and tests will not be run automatically.
In contrast, GitHub Actions works out of the box on a forked repository and can be easily configured to run a test workflow each time a commit is issued. This would help individual contributors test their code and ensure code quality before submitting a pull request against the repository.

Transparency

Current CI providers such as CircleCI allow anyone to view the console output when building and running tests but the test results can not be seen anywhere on the GitHub repository. To view this testing output: You need go to a different website, navigate a different user interface, and then sift through thousands of lines of console output. This is not a seamless developer experience.
In contrast, using GitHub Actions would provide all testing output directly on the repository’s GitHub page, which would help contributors to find, read, and use the test output to maintain code quality.

Control

GitHub Actions’ integration with other GitHub features means you can have finer control over the CI pipeline. For example, certain workflows can be set to only run on a new release. Workflows can even be used to close stale issues and pull requests.

Recommendation

We recommend that we consider using one consistent CI provider, GitHub Actions, which provides an integrated and seamless developer experience for all contributors.

Example

Please see this example that the C++ repository has adopted for the above reasons.

Next Steps

This issue shall serve as a place for discussion about this proposal.

Could a maintainer please assign this issue to us if approved?

cc: @Brandon-Kimberly @alolita

[tsloughter]

I can take care of this.