Add CI workflows for test workspace

[MarkusPettersson98]

The testing framework living in test/ historically had no CI checks. It didn't use to have it while it was developed in a separate repository, nor did it get any during its adoption into the app repository.

This PR introduces some basic CI checks when application logic is touched in the test workspace:

• rustfmt --check is run on all Rust source files
• clippy is run with the same configuration as the main app
• test-runner is compiled for all supported platforms (Linux, Windows & macOS)
• test-manager is compiled for all supported host platforms (Linux & macOS)

This should hopefully stabilize the development done to the testing framework. There is still more to be done on the CI front in the testing framework, but this is a good start.

Fixes DES-502

---

This change is 

[linear]

DES-502 Set up rudimentary CI for testing framework

[dlon]

Reviewed 3 of 3 files at r1, 1 of 1 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 7 unresolved discussions (waiting on @MarkusPettersson98)

---

.github/workflows/clippy-test.yml line 7 at r2 (raw file):

  pull_request:
    paths:
      - 'test/**/*.rs'

This should probably include the workflow itself.

---

.github/workflows/rustfmt-test.yml line 7 at r2 (raw file):

  pull_request:
    paths:
      - 'test/**/*.rs'

Same as above.

---

.github/workflows/rustfmt-test.yml line 19 at r2 (raw file):

        uses: actions-rs/toolchain@v1.0.6
        with:
          toolchain: stable

I know it's taken from rustfmt.yml, but surely "Install nightly Rust" isn't correct here? :)

---

.github/workflows/test-runner.yml line 1 at r2 (raw file):

# Compile the test runner

Nit: We build test-manager as well here. Maybe the jobs should also be renamed from build-test-runner... to build-test-framework`.

---

.github/workflows/test-runner.yml line 7 at r2 (raw file):

  pull_request:
    paths:
      - "test/**"

Same as above about including the workflow itself.

---

.github/workflows/test-runner.yml line 8 at r2 (raw file):

    paths:
      - "test/**"
      # Maybe we should check if changes to the app code (mullvad-management-interface) will break the test runner

That seems sensible! We use far more crates than just mullvad-management-interface, though. Would it be crazy to run this on the same conditions as daemon.yml? That does seem like the right thing to do.

---

.github/workflows/test-runner.yml line 52 at r2 (raw file):

      - name: Build test runner
        working-directory: test
        run: cargo build --release -p test-runner --target ${{ matrix.target }}

Maybe we could squeeze in the test-manager build here by adding a condition:

if: matrix.target != 'x86_64-pc-windows-gnu'

And building the test-runner in a step afterwards, unconditionally.

[MarkusPettersson98]

Reviewable status: 1 of 10 files reviewed, 7 unresolved discussions (waiting on @dlon)

---

.github/workflows/clippy-test.yml line 7 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, dlon (David Lönnhager) wrote…

This should probably include the workflow itself.

Good point 😊

---

.github/workflows/rustfmt-test.yml line 7 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, dlon (David Lönnhager) wrote…

Same as above.

Ack

---

.github/workflows/rustfmt-test.yml line 19 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, dlon (David Lönnhager) wrote…

I know it's taken from rustfmt.yml, but surely "Install nightly Rust" isn't correct here? :)

He.. :)

---

.github/workflows/test-runner.yml line 1 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, dlon (David Lönnhager) wrote…

Nit: We build test-manager as well here. Maybe the jobs should also be renamed from build-test-runner... to build-test-framework`.

Yeah, this should be de-duped

---

.github/workflows/test-runner.yml line 7 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, dlon (David Lönnhager) wrote…

Same as above about including the workflow itself.

Ack

---

.github/workflows/test-runner.yml line 8 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, dlon (David Lönnhager) wrote…

That seems sensible! We use far more crates than just mullvad-management-interface, though. Would it be crazy to run this on the same conditions as daemon.yml? That does seem like the right thing to do.

Hmm, I guess it is not too costly to do so. Better safe than sorry 😊

---

.github/workflows/test-runner.yml line 52 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, dlon (David Lönnhager) wrote…

Maybe we could squeeze in the test-manager build here by adding a condition:

if: matrix.target != 'x86_64-pc-windows-gnu'

And building the test-runner in a step afterwards, unconditionally.

Makes sense 😊

[MarkusPettersson98]

Reviewable status: 0 of 11 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @dlon)

---

.github/workflows/test-runner.yml line 52 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, MarkusPettersson98 (Markus Pettersson) wrote…

Makes sense 😊

I solved this by instead splitting up the build process into three distinct jobs: build-test-framework-linux, build-test-framework-macos & build-test-runner-windows 😊

[dlon]

Reviewed 12 of 12 files at r3, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved

---

.github/workflows/test-framework.yml line 8 at r3 (raw file):

    paths:
      - "test/**"
      - .github/workflows/test-framework.yml

These two should already be included by the paths below now.

---

.github/workflows/android-app.yml line 16 at r2 (raw file):

      - '!gui/**'
      - '!ios/**'
      - '!test/**'

This one probably could be kept.

[MarkusPettersson98]

Reviewable status: 10 of 12 files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @dlon)

---

.github/workflows/android-app.yml line 16 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, dlon (David Lönnhager) wrote…

This one probably could be kept.

Good catch!

---

.github/workflows/test-framework.yml line 8 at r3 (raw file):

Previously, dlon (David Lönnhager) wrote…

These two should already be included by the paths below now.

done

[albin-mullvad]

Reviewed 1 of 2 files at r4.
Reviewable status: 11 of 12 files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @dlon)

[dlon]

Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r4, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved

[dlon]

Reviewed 4 of 4 files at r5, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved

---

.github/workflows/testframework.yml line 3 at r5 (raw file):

# Compile the test framework
---
name: DES Testframework - Build

Nit: Should probably be two words: test framework. Also, why not "Desktop"?

[MarkusPettersson98]

Reviewable status: 9 of 12 files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @dlon)

---

.github/workflows/testframework.yml line 3 at r5 (raw file):

Previously, dlon (David Lönnhager) wrote…

Nit: Should probably be two words: test framework. Also, why not "Desktop"?

Makes sense. I used the Linear convention (DES), but "Desktop" is aligned better with the current naming convention of other workflows.

[dlon]

Reviewed 1 of 3 files at r6, 3 of 3 files at r7, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved

[dlon]

Reviewed 3 of 3 files at r8, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved