Add Option to Enable corepack

[beeequeue]

Description:
Adds the corepack option, which if true will run corepack enable to enable corepack.

You can see a test run of it here: https://github.com/BeeeQueue/arm-server/runs/7380286080?check_suite_focus=true

Related issue:
Closes #531
#480 - @dmitry-shibanov says that this change would not bring enough value to users, but I agree with @shellscape that being able to move most if not all of the node setup into one step is quite nice 🙂
#482 - That PR adds automatic support for it which could potentially be breaking, this PR adds an option which should not break anything

Check list:

• Mark if documentation changes are required.
• Mark if tests were added or updated to cover the changes.

[beeequeue]

I can't figure out why the test is failing based on the other tests... 😕

[wuzzeb]

Is it possible to completely remove pnpm/action-setup with this? What I mean is

- uses: actions/node-setup@v3
  with:
    node-version: "18"
    corepack: true
    cache: "pnpm"

would be enough with no other actions so no pnpm installed at all before node-setup? I would think so because node is installed, corepack enable is run, and then after that the caching is setup. Thus the first time node-setup calls pnpm for the caching, corepack should install pnpm.

If so, I think the documentation in advanced-usage.md should be updated, perhaps add a section to the caching showing just this configuration without pnpm/action-setup.

[yarinsa]

@beeequeue Thank you for this contribution! When do you think this will get merged? If so?

[yarinsa]

Looks good

[RavenK1ll]

I also have a 32G dcim that i user at beginning of build. Would that he of user?

[RavenK1ll]

Should i switch dcim cards?

[beeequeue]

Presumably after the test starts passing, and I can't get it to on my Windows machine 😢

[RavenK1ll]

So what an I looking

[RavenK1ll]

So what an I looking at here?

[jtbandes]

@dsame @brcrista Since #531 was rejected, but it's clear that many people are interested in this feature, could you please provide some feedback on this PR and/or #482 which are two proposals to add corepack support? Currently it seems the PRs have received no feedback from maintainers.

[styfle]

🎉

[yarinsa]

@beeequeue What's your ETA on merging this?

[brcrista]

@jtbandes it's not rejected; I just said it's not a priority yet: #531 (comment)

It looks like some of the tests were added are failing. @beeequeue I don't know a lot about this domain, but are you sure corepack is installed on the hosted runner?

When I have an issue with an Actions workflow I can't reproduce locally, I usually end up having to add some console.log calls to find the problem.

[beeequeue]

None of the test errors seem to be because of the PR, and would probably pass if they run again which I can't do

I manged to reproduce it, but got no idea why it's happening

I'm not very motivated to try to figure out why the tests fail after the rebase, nothing is wrong and it works perfectly so I'm just gonna use my branch in my projects.

[beeequeue]

Superseded by #651