Testing Farm as Git Hub Action - Typescript version 🚜

[jamacku]

This PR aims to reimplement the current Action in a language that will allow easier extendability and testability than the current composite yaml/python/bash implementation.

I chose TypeScript because it's the language Git Hub uses to write the official Actions. There are a lot of libraries that make writing GitHub Actions easier than in other languages.

This PR is keeping the current behavior/inputs/outputs except:

• input git_url - removed - this value can be gathered from the GitHub context
• input debug - removed - we should use the native version of running Actions in debug mode - https://docs.github.com/en/actions/monitoring-and-troubleshooting-workflows/enabling-debug-logging

Notes from going through the current implementation:

• input pr_head_sha - is this useful/needed?
• outputs - are they used outside of the tfaga Action?

TODO:

• Tests
• Documentation updates, if needed
• Manual testing of all potential scenarios/ configurations
• Review

Suggestions

• I suggest installing the Codecov GitHub App. It's a great way to track your test coverage - https://github.com/marketplace/codecov

[github-advanced-security]

This pull request sets up GitHub code scanning for this repository. Once the scans have completed and the checks have passed, the analysis results for this pull request branch will appear on this overview. Once you merge this pull request, the 'Security' tab will show more code scanning analysis results (for example, for the default branch). Depending on your configuration and choice of analysis tool, future pull requests will be annotated with code scanning analysis results. For more information about GitHub code scanning, check out the documentation.

[codecov-commenter]

Welcome to Codecov 🎉

Once merged to your default branch, Codecov will compare your coverage reports and display the results in this comment.

Thanks for integrating Codecov - We've got you covered ☂️

[zmiklank]

Action items for zmiklank - look at how pr_head_sha is used in current action.

[zmiklank]

Action items for zmiklank - look at how pr_head_sha is used in current action.

So it is used only when using this action to test a PR. Only used to obtain sha of the latest commit in PR. If this can be obtained in some more straightforward way then we do not need this.
Please note, that the testing-farm-as-a-github-action needs to know this SHA without need to cloning the tested repo directly in the GitHub action because for most use-cases is sufficient to clone the tested repo on the TF machine.

Also, if we want to remove this input, even though it seems like non-breaking change, I would consider to release it as tfaga v3.

TODO for @zmiklank: to create needed changes in tfaga-wrapper as discussed in person.

[zmiklank]

The 'typescript' branch in tfaga-wrapper was created. I also created draft PR for nginx that moves nginx testing to this typescript-written tfaga once this PR is merged to 'typescript' branch.

[jamacku]

@zmiklank, @phracek, I think it's ready for review.

[jamacku]

@phracek, I have added a DEVELOPMENT.md document. It should help you and others get started with Typescript and GitHub Actions.

[phracek]

@jamacku I see there is checkbox called Manual testing of all potential scenarios/ configurations. What does it mean?

[jamacku]

@phracek, It was just a note for me to try to test it "manually" using my fork of nginx-container, but I think the best would be to test it directly in nginx-container upstream.

I did some basic tests and the basics work.

[phracek]

I would prefer to merge it to typescript branch and start with testing on real container. Let's fix problems in typescript branch in real life.