Enhancement: Switch from Travis CI to GitHub Actions

[localheinz]

This PR

• switches from Travis CI to GitHub Actions

💁‍♂️ You can see this in action at localheinz#1.

[nikic]

Turns out we can't use GH actions right now, as we need someone to verify the @php-pulls email address. Marking as changes requested until we can get that done.

GH Actions is now usable in the PHP organization

[localheinz]

@nikic

Thank you for the update!

[cmb69]

[…], as we need someone to verify the @php-pulls email address.

Who could do that?

[nikic]

@cmb69 This is already done, so it's fine to merge.

[localheinz]

Quick heads-up, the workflow is exactly the same as the one in php/doc-de#2, with one slight difference:

--- doc-de/.github/workflows/integrate.yaml	2021-01-08 18:06:49.000000000 +0100
+++ doc-en/.github/workflows/integrate.yaml	2021-01-08 18:08:30.000000000 +0100
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
     strategy:
       matrix:
         language:
-          - "de"
+          - "en"

     steps:
       - name: "Checkout php/doc-${{ matrix.language }}"

The idea is to use workflows with the least differences across all repositories.

Instead of using a matrix, we could also parse the language identifier from the repository name, if that makes sense.

[localheinz]

@afilina

Quick note on why I use

on:
  pull_request: null

here: I use yamllint in my repositories to lint YAML files, and the configuration I use complains when leaving it empty.

For an example, see https://github.com/ergebnis/php-library-template/blob/f6af5cb5c234a146f620061e95b34b432bf2e1c8/.github/workflows/integrate.yaml#L32-L37.

[afilina]

Thanks for clarifying :)

[cmb69]

The idea is to use workflows with the least differences across all repositories.

That makes sense.

Instead of using a matrix, we could also parse the language identifier from the repository name, if that makes sense.

I think it's good as is.

Is this ready to be merged, @localheinz ?

[localheinz]

@cmb69

👍

[cmb69]

Thank you, @localheinz !

[localheinz]

Thank you, @cmb69!

[localheinz]

@cmb69

Is there interest in adding more tooling to the workflows?

[cmb69]

Well, it might be nice to actually build the documentation for pull request, so it could be viewed, but I have doubts that that's reasonably doable. Other than that, running ./configure as it's done now, is probably all we need. :)

[localheinz]

@cmb69

That sounds quite cool, actually, and should be possible!