Build another docker image that uses the .env.staging file instead of .env.production and tag it with "staging"

[NicoBiernat]

This is definitely a hacky little solution but it might work for simply building a second docker image with the .env.development file instead of the default .env.production file that is used when building the website.

How it "works" (we'll see if it works, when the action runs successfully):
In GitHub Actions I added a copy of the metadata and build-and-push action steps where an environment variable with the value "dev" is passed as a docker build-arg to the Dockerfile. The Dockerfile then appends this environment variable to npm run build which then becomes npm run builddev which conveniently is a script in package.json that uses the env-cmd tool to run craco build with the .env.development file.

[fwcd]

Instead of running these sequentially, I'd suggest running them either as parallel jobs, maybe via different matrix configurations. This would avoid a fair bit of duplication here.

[NicoBiernat]

I thought that there might be a way to avoid code duplication, but I didn't know how, so I simply duplicated it.
Feel free to refactor 😄

[NicoBiernat]

Docker build takes too long, I cancelled it after 6 minutes. On my laptop it took ~24 minutes.
@fwcd Do you know what change might cause it to take this long?

[fwcd]

Docker CI on the main branch takes 2 minutes: https://github.com/ProjectLighthouseCAU/luna/actions/runs/10551448727/job/29228906391

So it really shouldn't take that long. Not sure why that happens for you locally, in CI my only guess would be that the aarch64 build is slow under emulation, but with the --platform=$BUILDPLATFORM flag that shouldn't be needed.

[NicoBiernat]

That must have been the problem, now the CI runs fast enough (could be sped up with parallel execution though).
And the "Build and push dev image" step successfully executed env-cmd -f .env.development craco build instead of craco build.

[fwcd]

Thanks!