Migrate CI to GitHub Actions?

[jacobtomlinson]

Due to changes in the Travis CI billing, the Dask org is migrating Travis CI to GitHub Actions.

This repo appears to use CircleCI. As we are putting in the effort to migrate many projects to GitHub Actions does it make sense to standardise here?

See dask/community#107 for more details.

[jameslamb]

Instead of anyone spending time on this, I think it's worth waiting a little longer for xgboost.dask to be fully ready to replace dask-xgboost (dask/community#104)

XGBoost maintainers have a pull request up right now for the last remaining issue from #39 that is needed for xgboost.dask to be usable as a full replacement for dask-xgboost (dmlc/xgboost#6343)

I'd hate to see someone spend a lot of time moving this project's CI just for it to be abandoned in a few months.

If you disagree and there's something I haven't thought about, I'd be happy to do the work to move it to GitHub Actions.

[jakirkham]

My guess is Jacob was opening issues across all of the Dask repos. So probably wasn't thinking of the specifics of each repo. Feel free to correct me if that is incorrect Jacob 🙂

That said, yeah agree that we don't need to worry about that change on this repo for now. If we need to update this repo again in the future, we might want to revisit at that time

[jacobtomlinson]

Yeah I was just opening issues on all affected repos in order to start discussions and track things.

I propose we take no action here but leave this open pending the upstream work. I assume once xgboost.dask is ready this repo will be archived anyway.