Nexus MVP

[elipe17]

Summary of Changes

• Stood Nexus up on Raft internal cluster
• Created users/roles/repos for Nexus
• Connected pipelines to Nexus for image building/pulling Pull request closes #2458

How to Test

1. Follow the instructions for the Nexus Admin UI login and the Local Docker Login
2. Docker compose up your frontend and backend. If everything worked from step 1, you should be pulling all of your images from Nexus now.

Deliverables

More details on how deliverables herein are assessed included here.

Deliverable 1: Accepted Features

Checklist of ACs:

• [x] Nexus is accessible via a service account
• [x] Nexus is automatically updated with newly built images
• [x] Testing Checklist has been run and all tests pass
• [x] README is updated, if necessary

Deliverable 2: Tested Code

• Are all areas of code introduced in this PR meaningfully tested?
  • [x] If this PR introduces backend code changes, are they meaningfully tested?
  • [x] If this PR introduces frontend code changes, are they meaningfully tested?
• Are code coverage minimums met?
  • [x] Frontend coverage: [insert coverage %] (see CodeCov Report comment in PR)
  • [x] Backend coverage: [insert coverage %] (see CodeCov Report comment in PR)

Deliverable 3: Properly Styled Code

• [x] Are backend code style checks passing on CircleCI?
• [x] Are frontend code style checks passing on CircleCI?
• [x] Are code maintainability principles being followed?

Deliverable 4: Accessible

• [ ] Does this PR complete the epic?
• [ ] Are links included to any other gov-approved PRs associated with epic?
• [ ] Does PR include documentation for Raft's a11y review?
• [ ] Did automated and manual testing with iamjolly and ttran-hub using Accessibility Insights reveal any errors introduced in this PR?

Deliverable 5: Deployed

• [ ] Was the code successfully deployed via automated CircleCI process to development on Cloud.gov?

Deliverable 6: Documented

• [x] Does this PR provide background for why coding decisions were made?
• [ ] If this PR introduces backend code, is that code easy to understand and sufficiently documented, both inline and overall?
• [ ] If this PR introduces frontend code, is that code easy to understand and sufficiently documented, both inline and overall?
• [ ] If this PR introduces dependencies, are their licenses documented?
• [x] Can reviewer explain and take ownership of these elements presented in this code review?

Deliverable 7: Secure

• [x] Does the OWASP Scan pass on CircleCI?
• [x] Do manual code review and manual testing detect any new security issues?
• [x] If new issues detected, is investigation and/or remediation plan documented?

Deliverable 8: User Research

Research product(s) clearly articulate(s):

• [ ] the purpose of the research
• [ ] methods used to conduct the research
• [ ] who participated in the research
• [ ] what was tested and how
• [ ] impact of research on TDP
• [ ] (if applicable) final design mockups produced for TDP development

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 92.66%. Comparing base (57bdf7a) to head (c15cb7c). Report is 74 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

[](https://app.codecov.io/gh/raft-tech/TANF-app/pull/3165?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=raft-tech) ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## develop #3165 +/- ## ======================================== Coverage 92.66% 92.66% ======================================== Files 47 47 Lines 1009 1009 Branches 169 169 ======================================== Hits 935 935 Misses 42 42 Partials 32 32 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/raft-tech/TANF-app/pull/3165/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=raft-tech) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [dev-frontend](https://app.codecov.io/gh/raft-tech/TANF-app/pull/3165/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=raft-tech) | `92.66% <ø> (ø)` | | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=raft-tech#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more. ------ [Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry](https://app.codecov.io/gh/raft-tech/TANF-app/pull/3165?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=continue&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=raft-tech). > **Legend** - [Click here to learn more](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/codecov-delta?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=raft-tech) > `Δ = absolute (impact)`, `ø = not affected`, `? = missing data` > Powered by [Codecov](https://app.codecov.io/gh/raft-tech/TANF-app/pull/3165?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=footer&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=raft-tech). Last update [5b8feae...c15cb7c](https://app.codecov.io/gh/raft-tech/TANF-app/pull/3165?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=lastupdated&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=raft-tech). Read the [comment docs](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/pull-request-comments?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=raft-tech).

[reitermb]

On deck for office hours today

[ADPennington]

@vlasse86 -- @elipe17 and I will pair on this ticket for qasp review on 10/2.