Pre-install node modules for Docker workflow

[GeorgeCodes19]

Ticket

No ticket

Changes

• The Docker development workflow will now utilize a temporary Docker container to install dependencies on the host machine. This means that devs do not need to install node on their host machine and makes getting started with Docker a one-step command make dev.
• Added path alias support to make the experience around relative paths more manageable

Context for reviewers

Missing dependencies on the host machine

When opting to use Docker to develop and run the application the dependencies are only installed inside the container when building the image. This will cause IDEs to trigger an error about missing dependencies (node_modules) since they are not installed on the host machine.

Testing

Alias

resolution

Docker

The make dev command has been modified to check for the node_modules directory and remove any existing containers to avoid a container naming collision.

[github-actions[bot]]

Coverage report for app

St.:grey_question:	Category	Percentage	Covered / Total
🟡	Statements	76.54%	62/81
🟡	Branches	64.29%	9/14
🟡	Functions	71.43%	10/14
🟡	Lines	75%	54/72

Test suite run success

7 tests passing in 3 suites.

Report generated by 🧪jest coverage report action from 000bfd53bbf352c675676f7a46de9471bd342e66

[rocketnova]

I don't know if this is an issue for npm/node packages, but I've generally avoided doing this for package dependencies because packages sometimes aren't cross-platform compatible. Package managers typically do a good job of identifying which arch they need to be installing for. In this case, you're specifically installing packages that are good on debian, which may cause issues on Apple Silicon, etc

[sawyerh]

@rocketnova Yea good point. I think if the intent is for dependency files to be present so IDEs can find the imports, this might be fine

[rocketnova]

@sawyerh Do you think it's safe to assume that all developers working natively will be using IDEs? I don't 😅 but I also don't develop natively.

[sawyerh]

@rocketnova What do you use? I may not be fully understanding

[rocketnova]

@sawyerh Ah I see. I have misunderstood this issue. I apologize. I see that this PR is specifically for solving the local docker-based development workflow and making sure node_modules isn't empty because we're only bind mounting a subset of the development dir.

I think this PR approach is fine, but I would nit that we might want to rename the make target something more specific than make init. Perhaps make init-container?