GitHub Action quality checks.

[anthonyshew]

I noticed #34 leaves some lack of clarity when it comes to quality in the repo. In this PR, I'm hoping to help along the process of cleaning up the codebase by introducing quality checks.

Big note: I did this with Turborepo as a POC. More than happy to open an RFC in Discussions to explain why. (One of those reasons being the obvious bias in my bio.) 😄

[tmyracle]

since this monorepo already uses NX is there a benefit to adding turbo as another tool? i believe there's already some pre-commit checks around linting/formatting, is it possible to achieve the same output without introducing a new package? love vercel btw, just trying to avoid more dependencies if we don't absolutely need them.

[anthonyshew]

Agreed! We can reduce a ton of dependency and code bloat, ending up with a much simpler Turborepo. This was largely a demonstrative PR to explore migrating incrementally to hear from maintainers!

[anthonyshew]

Realizing I should also note: I also did this keeping eventual self-hosters, self-deployers, etc. in mind since Vercel appears to be an intended first-class deploy target. I've seen rumblings to go for the cal.com strategy + Vercel-specific code in the repo.

We work really hard at making Turborepo (and Turbopack soon) a zero-config experience so hoping we could save tons of folks time and effort with a move. Lining up with the rest of the Vercel ecosystem would likely play out well long term.

[anthonyshew]

Saw that the project is moving to Rails so this one doesn't make too much sense from the perspective of ecosystem alignment anymore. 😄