Consider using GitHub Actions as a primary CI

[bsideup]

With the release of GitHub Actions CI/CD, it works perfectly fine with Testcontainers and can be used to run our tests.

Since we're working on migrating off Travis as our primary CI (see #1720), we need to consider which service to use instead, and GHA (GitHub Actions) looks like a good choice. It looks like Azure Pipelines (and AFAIK uses it under the hood) but does not come with Enterprise-style UI and users management, which is IMO better for an OSS project.

However, there are a few things in AZP (Azure Pipelines) that we still benefit from (listing them as checkboxes so that we can check them once there is such feature in GHA):

• [x] self-hosted agents - we run our own agent for Docker for Windows CI due to licensing issues of Docker for Windows
• [ ] test result aggregation - sounds small, but this dramatically reduces the time it takes to figure out why the build is failing and also helped us to pinpoint a few flaky tests

[rnorth]

I'm pretty on board with this. I can't see any huge reasons not to.

I think in time we should whittle down CI to just a single provider; the reason for having both Travis and CircleCI for most of the project's lifespan was due to needing compatibility testing with CircleCI's relatively unusual Docker executor implementation.

As things have become more standardised, we can afford to consolidate, and GitHub Actions seems like a future-ready direction to be moving in.

[stale[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. If you believe this is a mistake, please reply to this comment to keep it open. If there isn't one already, a PR to fix or at least reproduce the problem in a test case will always help us get back on track to tackle this.