Feature/issue 48 gha

[JohnHalleyGotway]

Pull Request Testing

• [x] Describe testing already performed for these changes:
  Ran many, many times on my feature branch to make sure it works well.

• [x] Recommend testing for the reviewer(s) to perform:
  For multiple reviewers, list specific instructions for each:
  

Please review the code changes as well as the output from recent GHA runs. NOTE that there are still 3 problems with METviewer:

1. Running with the "latest" tag in the 'Run Sandy' job actually fails. The loading step and downstream plotting steps fail.
2. The failures described above are NOT flagged as being failures. The code isn't checking return value correctly and maybe the failing steps aren't actually returning bad status.
3. The METviewer build step (both manually on the command line and via GHA) is failing. So while some of the GHA runs appear to be successful, they are not entirely.

• The GHA testing.yml workflow is triggered by pushing commits to a feature branch or when a pull request is submitted.

• If keywords are included in the latest commit message, that triggers components to be rebuilt (ci-build-all, ci-build-base, ci-build-wps-wrf, ci-build-gsi, ci-build-upp, ci-build-python, ci-build-met, ci-build-metviewer).

  • e.g. ci-build-base in this GHA run triggered all components to be rebuilt, after first rebuilding the base image. Look in the 'Determine which jobs to run' job, expand the 'Set job controls' step, and see:

    Build base and all components since ci-build-base is in the commit message.

• If any changes to those component directories are included, then those components are also rebuilt.

  • e.g. Modifying the UPP Dockerfile in this GHA run triggered it to be rebuilt. Look in the 'Determine which jobs to run' job, expand the 'Set job controls' step, and see:

    Build UPP since components/upp has changed.

• Note that the 'Artifacts' available after a successful run include the job control status, logs, and sandy output.

• [x] Are any changes to the online tutorial required for this PR? [No]
  If yes, please describe:
  

• [x] Will this PR change the output of any of the existing cases? [No]
  If yes, please describe:
  

• [x] Please complete this pull request review by [Fri 8/12/22].
  

Pull Request Checklist

• [x] Ensure the PR title matches the feature or bugfix branch name.
• [x] Define the PR metadata, as permissions allow: Select: Reviewer(s), Projects(s), and Milestone.
• [x] After submitting the PR, select Linked issues with the original issue number.
• [x] After the PR is approved, merge your changes, as permissions allow.
• [x] Close the linked issue and delete your feature or bugfix branch from GitHub.

[JohnHalleyGotway]

Note that I did modify this feature branch after submitting the PR. I had to tweak the logic to handle PR's instead of the just push events. Please take a look at this GHA run. In the "Determine which jobs to run", "Set job controls" step, the following demonstrates that it's diffing against at the correct reference branch (origin/main):

Modified files (git diff --name-only origin/main):
.github/jobs/bash_functions.sh .github/jobs/build_docker_image.sh .github/jobs/docker_utils.py .github/jobs/print_branch_name.py .github/jobs/run_case.sh .github/jobs/set_job_controls.sh .github/workflows/testing.yml components/metviewer/docker-compose-AWS-cases.yml components/metviewer/docker-compose-AWS.yml components/metviewer/docker-compose-cases.yml components/metviewer/docker-compose.yml

Build METviewer since components/metviewer has changed.

So that now works as it should. However, the METviewer build fails... but for other reasons unrelated to GHA.