migrate to GitHub Actions

[ocefpaf]

@bjlittle this should get the tests here working a bit faster and more reliably.

[ocefpaf]

You need to have one GHA actions for it to start in PRs. I'm not sure if there is another way.

[ocefpaf]

I left this one commented out b/c someone with admin privileges will need to set that token up. (I can remove this part of the code if you don't want it there.)

[bjlittle]

Closed by #66.

Thanks @ocefpaf. Stuck with cirrus-ci for continuity across SciTools repos.

I'm looking forward to the cirrus-ci vs GH actions discussion that's soon to come 👍

[ocefpaf]

I'm looking forward to the cirrus-ci vs GH actions discussion that's soon to come

I'm curious why the choice for cirrus-ci in the first place? The SciPy community is invested in GitHub Actions and it is definitely easier to get help from the larger community if we adopt the same infra as them. With that said, I have no idea if cirrus-ci is a better choice or not. Maybe SciTools can be the force to make the SciPy community to change to it 😬

[bjlittle]

@ocefpaf To be fair, our move to cirrus-ci was the result of a need to quickly migrate off travis-ci as SciTools/iris CI was effectively dead at the time.

I'm personally not vested in cirrus-ci as a solution, but it was a pattern being used for CI across SciTools... and I genuinely think that is up for debate.

I just opted for cirrus-ci here simply not to confuse matters, but I strongly suspect that we'll migrate to GH actions 👍