Fritz hoing Github actions improvements

[ichim-david]

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://volto--6120.org.readthedocs.build/

Checked out pull request https://github.com/plone/volto/pull/6108/files and fixed the issues
regarding the action run error codes for example:
Error: /home/runner/work/volto/volto/./.github/actions/pre_test_setup/action.yml (Line: 4, Col: 3): There's not enough info to determine what you meant. Add one of these properties: args, entrypoint, env, image, main, post, post-entrypoint, pre, pre-entrypoint, steps

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for plone-components canceled.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	f0f14bf
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/plone-components/deploys/667bf93ea6c53c0008455415

[ichim-david]

Closing in favor of having commit suggestions to the original pull request #6108 (review)

[ichim-david]

@stevepiercy Have another look here, this pull request still contains the work of @FritzHoing with the right attribution plus my changes since it's very cumbersome todo suggest commits especially where it's a trial and error.
Every shell: bash is needed, you can look at the failures I got after removing them f04c741
and all of the commits I did until the build was clean

[stevepiercy]

Thanks for the thorough verification of extracting all the repetitive steps, including bash requirement. I especially like that you added a name to an unnamed step. It's documentation! 😁

@plone/volto-team this is good work that you could use as an example and apply to your own CI to avoid copy-pasta mistakes. Please take a moment to review.

[sneridagh]

@ichim-david @FritzHoing Awesome work! Thanks for working on this. Could we find a better naming for the action? pre_test_setup is too vague for me, in anticipation that we could have more in the future. How about node_pnpm_setup or setup_node_pnpm? Ahhhh, naming, naming

[stevepiercy]

I find naming a thing by what it does, not its tool name, is usually more descriptive and long-lived. If you ever change the tool (which never happens in JavaScript), you don't have to change the name.

It creates a universal test setup, so universal_test_setup works for me.

[ichim-david]

@sneridagh @stevepiercy I agree on the naming needs tweaking, it's for that reason that I replaced Pretest-Setup with
name: Set up testing infrastructure when using it. Should that naming also be changed so something else?

I don't mind the universal_test_setup naming.
acceptance_test_setup?

Maybe you can come to an agreement on the naming and proposing it then, maybe talk with Eric and David and see what you guys thing makes most sense.

[sneridagh]

@stevepiercy @ichim-david the fact is that it can be used outside acceptance, in unit and code quality too. It's setting up the node version and pnpm in the right way. Also, is not universal, as we can configure other things too, like Python...

[sneridagh]

@stevepiercy and I, we discussed it and agreed on node_env_setup, @ichim-david opinion?

[ichim-david]

@sneridagh I'm fine with it what about the step name?

[sneridagh]

@ichim-david Set up NodeJS environment ? @stevepiercy ?

[stevepiercy]

Yup. We have a winner!

[ichim-david]

@sneridagh done, let's see the testing and then a merge of main and I think it's good to go.

[stevepiercy]

It's Node.js per https://nodejs.org/en