ci: generate ts typings for grpc client stub

[sebastiendan]

Description

#229 introduced JavaScript gRPC client stubs generation through a new CI workflow. This PR adds the generation of TypeScript typings so that TypeScript clients can better use our client stubs.

Additionally, this PR changes the npm package publication flow to the following one:

• First of all, the CI workflow will only run when
  • the push on main contains changes to protobuf files
  • the PR contains changes to protobuf files (coming from the active update or previous ones)
• On PR updates, a step will check whether the npm package version was bumped and make the job fail if not
• On merge on main, the npm publish step is run if the above was successful

Testing this new logic:

• run that shows a failure because of missing version bump
• run that shows a success because version was bumped

Additions and Changes

• Add the grpc_tools_node_protoc_ts npm package as dep
• Install protoc in the CI workflow
• Use protoc with a bin packaged in grpc_tools_node_protoc_ts to generate typings
• Bump npm package version to 0.1.1

PR Checklist:

• I have performed a self-review of my code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• I have added or updated tests that comprehensively prove my change is effective or that my feature works

[Freyskeyd]

Could you rename the github action workflow to gRPC client stubs generation as we could add more language to this workflow at some point.

[gruberb]

LGTM 👍

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #232 (8b78e53) into main (50226f8) will decrease coverage by 0.32%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head 8b78e53 differs from pull request most recent head cb73631. Consider uploading reports for the commit cb73631 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #232      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   59.85%   59.53%   -0.32%     
==========================================
  Files         171      170       -1     
  Lines        9752     9644     -108     
==========================================
- Hits         5837     5742      -95     
+ Misses       3915     3902      -13     

see 12 files with indirect coverage changes

[gruberb]

Looks good, thanks for the detailed write-up!

Just wondering if there is a scenario where the types of the JS gRPC client could be newer than the current release? Merging with main doesn't mean release, so the first logic seem to make more sense to me (because now we could have a situation with unreleased, but updated types in main the JS client is using, but the currently deployed topos network is not yet using).

[gruberb]

Looks good, thanks for the detailed write-up!

Just wondering if there is a scenario where the types of the JS gRPC client could be newer than the current release? Merging with main doesn't mean release, so the first logic seem to make more sense to me (because now we could have a situation with unreleased, but updated types in main the JS client is using, but the currently deployed topos network is not yet using).

[sebastiendan]

Looks good, thanks for the detailed write-up!

Just wondering if there is a scenario where the types of the JS gRPC client could be newer than the current release? Merging with main doesn't mean release, so the first logic seem to make more sense to me (because now we could have a situation with unreleased, but updated types in main the JS client is using, but the currently deployed topos network is not yet using).

Housekeeping: This was replied on Slack