[skip gpuci] Add GitHub Actions workflow for PRs

[jjacobelli]

TODO

[harrism]

Should we push this to 22.10? Still a draft as we are entering code freeze.

[raydouglass]

Should we push this to 22.10? Still a draft as we are entering code freeze.

Yes. I've updated the base branch.

[jjacobelli]

I think this PR would be a good opportunity to establish some conventions for the GitHub Check names shown in the screenshot below.

I'm partial to the following conventions:

* All lowercase characters

* Removing all spaces

* Using kebab case (e.g. something-like-this)

* Removing special characters (e.g. `cpp` instead of `c++`)

Let me know your thoughts.

It seems you would to have slugs as display name for the jobs. I'm not sure to understand why? I totally agree that we need to rethink about the names, but I think we should keep a good display name instead of slugs. WDYT?

[ajschmidt8]

It seems you would to have slugs as display name for the jobs. I'm not sure to understand why? I totally agree that we need to rethink about the names, but I think we should keep a good display name instead of slugs. WDYT?

My main concern is the amount of text that is included in the GitHub Check itself. I think these should be succinct. Currently, they're very long. e.g.

compared to our Jenkins checks:

I think they both still convey an adequate amount of information to developers. But the first one is verbose and gets cut off in the GUI as a result.

So something like

pr / workflow / conda / python-build (11.5.1, ubuntu20.04, amd64, 3.8)

or

pr / workflow / conda-python / build (11.5.1, ubuntu20.04, amd64, 3.8)

instead of

CI for PRs / Workflow / Python build / Conda Python matrix build (11.5.1, ubuntu20.04, amd64, 3.8)

would be ideal I think.

[jjacobelli]

Closed in favor of https://github.com/rapidsai/rmm/pull/1099