Add GH Actions CI Workflow

[ihcsim]

Change Overview

This PR re-enables the GH Actions CI workflow. I would like to let it run in parallel to the current CI setup to compare the two CI solutions in terms of their speed, efficiency, responsiveness, flakiness and cost.

All the existing Travis CI jobs and stages have been added to the GH Actions main.yaml workflow. A completed successful CI run looks like this:

See https://github.com/kanisterio/kanister/actions/runs/2097423926.

Some highlights include:

• Parallel, independent jobs to run the test, integration-test, and helm-test suites
• Parallel, independent jobs to build the controller, kanctl and kando binaries
• Independent k3d clusters to run the test suites
• Run the release job only when there is a new merge into master or a new tag
• Takes about 25 minutes to complete compared to at least 30 mins on Travis (excluding the make release-snapshot target)
• Test flakes happen less frequently with the k3d setup

Pull request type

Please check the type of change your PR introduces:

• CI/CD

Issues

• Previously Remove github actions from CI #917, Disable github actions #894

[viveksinghggits]

Like we discussed we should let it run parallel to travis for sometime.

[pavannd1]

LGTM
Question on the images being built - will we have both Travis and GHA trying to build and tag the same docker images?

[ihcsim]

@pavannd1 yes, but it should be idempotent.

[julio-lopez]

🎉 🎊 🚀 🥳
🥇Thanks for doing this.

In future iterations it'd be good to explore how to break down the jobs into smaller pieces, and also increase the level of parallelism. Also, it'd be good to figure out how long does it take to pass artifacts between jobs (accounting for both upload & download) and see whether or not that provides benefits vs. for example, re-running some steps.

Another thing to consider later is whether it makes sense to have the release job in a separate workflow.

[julio-lopez]

Like we discussed we should let it run parallel to travis for sometime.

It'd make sense to merge it then and have it be a "not required" check.

@viveksinghggits Do you want to kueue it?

[ihcsim]

Looks like mergify requires addition workflow permission to merge this.