@svanharmelen Ready for review when you have time

How (if at all) does this related to #1392? Of is this only used for development where the solution in #1392 is only used for acceptance tests?

Just trying to understand if we need both these approaches for this package...

@svanharmelen I would say yes both are good and work in conjunction with each other vs one being a replacement for the other. This is used for development but you can also run the acceptance tests in a GitPod if you desire. The only duplication that currently exists between the 2 PR's are the container startup scripts and either PR can go first as they should be basically identical.

@svanharmelen We can merge this and it will be combined and coincide with the work done on #1392

I'm going to wait with this one until I heart back from GitLab (I am talking with them about this repo)...

@svanharmelen Is that true of all pull requests on this repo or just ones pertaining to ease of development?

@Shocktrooper as you probably already noticed, it's only true for PRs that introduce new "concepts". PRs that contain bugfixes or that add missing or new APIs will still be reviewed and merged.

And once I have more clarity about the future of this repo, I (or someone else) will have a look at these ones as well!

I'll go ahead and close this since it's old and has conflicts at this point. We'll likely add something to it post-migration once we've figured that out 😄