Restructure to build image and run integration test on it

[unkcpz]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (ebc7120) 79.92% compared to head (eed1e47) 79.92%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #527   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   79.92%   79.92%           
=======================================
  Files          27       27           
  Lines        3815     3815           
=======================================
  Hits         3049     3049           
  Misses        766      766           

Flag	Coverage Δ
python-3.10	79.92% <ø> (ø)
python-3.8	79.95% <ø> (ø)
python-3.9	79.95% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[danielhollas]

Hmm, I have to say I am not sure I am a fan of this change. It seems to add a lot of extra complexity, not to mention increased CI time due to extra Docker build. Could you please explain what are the benefits here?

I liked the previous approach because we were simply using the actual image, so the tests were close to how the app would actually be installed.

[unkcpz]

I have to admit this seems not that useful as I thought after I did the change. For the qeapp, the benefits are straightforward because the image is the final goal and using it to do the integration test comes as a positive side effect.
Here, in order to run the integration test, the image has to be built first, which is not that bad although increasing the complexity and has small benefits that the installation of the package happened in the build phase which from my perspective easy to control than installed by conftest.

I would avoid to go this way.

[unkcpz]

I close this, because it is not a good idea to use such a complex way to build and test notebook.