Migrate to GitHub workflows

[alonyb]

This PR contains a new pipeline for this project with GitHub Workflows

There are 2 files, one for PUSH/PR and other for release.

PUSH & PR FILE:

• Run all travis commands before deploying stage

RELEASE FILE:

• Run all travis commands including deploying stage
• For creating a new release, it must have a tag in the commit and then push the tag, and the pipeline will create a release automatically.

To see logs about the workflow see the fork on my repo here , both config files are included

This PR will help with this #451

[ahmetb]

@RubenBaez in the meanwhile, I've opened this issue suggesting we can move krew-index to GitHub Workflows. It should be much more straightforward since it's a smaller workflow.

Would you have cycles to do that? I think we can merge that much more comfortably.

[alonyb]

@ahmetb
I can maintain it for a while and see that there are no problems :), and sure I will check it.

[corneliusweig]

Hey @RubenBaez, this is looking great! Thanks a lot for your work.

The latest version with all-in-one file looks quite clean, I like it. Also maintenance-wise, this looks pretty reasonable.

One last concern that I have is: could we accidentally pick up a malicious action which steals the github token? I have no idea if and how the actions on the marketplace are screened. Is that a relevant concern, or am I just being paranoid?

I'm still curious what @ferhatelmas thinks about the latest version.

[corneliusweig]

Ok, to me this looks quite good now.

There are twoone more things that we need to take care of:

• We used to export code coverage to codecov.io, but the pipeline no longer does it. There is a GH action https://github.com/codecov/codecov-action for this, but it requires a token. Or would the usual bash <(curl -s https://codecov.io/bash) way work without a token?

• We have no GITHUB_TOKEN configured, but the release step needs one. This is clearly our job 😉 GH actions does this automatically, see https://github.com/actions/create-release#example-workflow---create-a-release

[ahmetb]

We can remove Codecov altogether, I haven't been finding it super useful to be honest.

[alonyb]

Ok, to me this looks quite good now.

There are twoone more things that we need to take care of:

• We used to export code coverage to codecov.io, but the pipeline no longer does it. There is a GH action https://github.com/codecov/codecov-action for this, but it requires a token. Or would the usual bash <(curl -s https://codecov.io/bash) way work without a token?
• We have no GITHUB_TOKEN configured, but the release step needs one. This is clearly our job 😉 GH actions does this automatically, see https://github.com/actions/create-release#example-workflow---create-a-release

@corneliusweig
As @ahmetb said

We can remove Codecov altogether, I haven't been finding it super useful, to be honest.

I didn't put it in the pipeline. Therefore. If you change your mind. Or then it becomes necessary, I could add that step :)

[corneliusweig]

Alright, let's put this on trial. As discussed, we'll run travis alongside for a while, see if the results are identical, and watch out for maintenance overhead.

Thanks for pushing this through! @alonyb

/lgtm
Since it's quite a delicate change, let's wait for a 👍 from @ahmetb.

[ahmetb]

/approve
Thanks for the continuous work here. I hope this works out.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ahmetb, alonyb

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [ahmetb]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[corneliusweig]

Hey @alonyb,

I have one final request: You seem to follow closely how GH actions evolve. Should you learn that the env variable workaround (https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/krew/pull/461/files#diff-e9f950f17198d3d5e3122a44230a09b9R32) can be done in a cleaner way (or can be skipped), could you open a follow-up PR for that?

[alonyb]

@corneliusweig
Sure, I'm going to do some research and open the PR. No problem.