Fix all the deprecated-warnings and upgrade django to 1.11

[sks444]

Toward #611

Note: This PR has changes incompatible with Python 2.7 and is a part of the task involving Django 2.2 upgrade

• Upgrading django-pagedown to 1.0.6 because the latest version doesn't support Django 1.11, will be upgrading to latest while moving to Django 2.0

• Fix AttributeError: type object 'RadioSelect' has no attribute 'renderer': 1

• Use django-markdown-app as django_markdown is not maintained.

• Upgrade djangorestframework to latest version which removes the support of filters, so update django-filters to latest and made changes according to the requirements: 1

• Upgrade celery to latest version

• Droping use of django-uuidfield as Django has it's own UUIDfield: need to figure out a way to handle the migration

• Upgrade django-bootstrap3==11.0.0, needs to upgraded to latest while moving to Django 2

• core.context_processors is moved to template.context_processors

• Use user.is_authenticated as property

After these changes, only deprecated warnings remaining is related to Django which I think will vanish when we finally move to Django 2.0

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.03%) to 67.292% when pulling e70b6b2 on sks444:fix-all-deprecated-warnings into 49af450 on pythonindia:master.

[pradyunsg]

@sks444 If you could make atomic commits, that'd make reviewing your PR (as well as iterating on them later) much easier! ^>^

[sks444]

Okay, so we'll move to Django's UUIDField and figure out a way to migrate old data to this.

@pradyunsg would appreciate some help around this.

So I replaced the django-uuidfield with Django's UUIDField which created a new migration. But the old migration of this field still exists which will throw error as the uuidfield package doesn't exist anymore. What do you think would be the best way to handle this scenario, currently I am commenting out the lines which uses that package in the old migration.

Also, how do I migrate the new migrations, as uuid column for this model already exists. And while doing so how do I make sure that the old data of that field is migrated to the new one.

I looked it up online but couldn't find anything on how to tackle this problem, some guidance/hints would be great. :)

[sks444]

Okay, so this is resolved, as I got to know that it's better to edit the old migration files to pretend that the field was always a models.UUIDField. That way we won't require any migration. Checkout the answer at Django Forum for more clarification.

[sks444]

@sks444 If you could make atomic commits, that'd make reviewing your PR (as well as iterating on them later) much easier! ^>^

Yes, thank you for the suggestion @pradyunsg , I will try to do atomic commits. Actually in this case, when I upgrade django, it starts breaking few other things, so all those fixes should go in one commit right? Or should I have a separate commit for each of the fix? But they are dependent on only one thing, i.e. upgrading django.

[pradyunsg]

I think a separate commit per fix would be better.

[sks444]

I think this is ready for review now. :)

[ananyo2012]

@sks444 Why are new migrations created for conferences and proposals ? There is no change in conference or proposal model.

[ananyo2012]

Also can you rebase your changes on the latest master and solve the linting errors.

[sks444]

@sks444 Why are new migrations created for conferences and proposals ? There is no change in conference or proposal model.

@ananyo2012, That is coming from the simple_history package upgrade as we are using simple_history models for conference and proposal models.

I moved the migration files to simple_history package upgrade commit so that it would be reasonable.

[sks444]

So everything seems to be running perfectly, tests are passing and I am interacting with the UI and checking if these changes break something. But as I don't have much experience with the project I might miss few features. @pradyunsg, @ananyo2012, would be great if you could help me with the same. :)

[pradyunsg]

Do your thing Travis CI.

[ananyo2012]

@sks444 Can you rebase your changes over the latest master ?

[sks444]

Rebased @ananyo2012

[palnabarun]

Note: Putting a hold on the merge until the upgrade compatibility is tested

[palnabarun]

@sks444 The CI is failing due to conflicting migrations. Can you please check?

[sks444]

Resolved the migration issue @palnabarun

[pradyunsg]

* Upgrade djangorestframework to latest version

This isn't supported on Python 2.

@pythonindia/pycon-india-2020-junction Do we care about Python 2 support? If not, let's drop it?

[palnabarun]

@sks444 Thank you for resolving that.

@pradyunsg We do care about Python 2 at the moment.

[onlinejudge95]

@sks444 need your input in #687

[sks444]

@onlinejudge95 we can not move directly to Django 2 without merging this pr as it would break a lot of things.

I have made all the changes here which are required to upgrade to Django 1.11. Although I have tested this on my system, it would very helpful if you could also verify this on yours. So that we could go ahead and merge this and then we can try upgrading to Django 2 and see what breaks.

[onlinejudge95]

@sks444 on it

Even I was bumping the versions incrementally it failed for 1.10 for me due to obsolete dependencies.

[palnabarun]

@sks444 -- can you please change the target of your changes to django-2.2 branch? We are starting to merge Django upgrade related changes to that branch.

[sks444]

Done @palnabarun

[onlinejudge95]

@sks444 @palnabarun Django REST framework has dropped support for Python2.7 link. I doubt we will be able to pass the installation steps in Travis build due to this.

Proposing to drop support for Python2.7, what do you say guys?

[ananyo2012]

We will be dropping Python 2.7 support and remove it from before this is merged

…

On Tue, 9 Jun, 2020, 2:15 PM onlinejudge95, ***@***.***> wrote: @sks444 <https://github.com/sks444> @palnabarun <https://github.com/palnabarun> Django REST framework has dropped support for Python2.7 link <https://www.django-rest-framework.org/#requirements>. I doubt we will be able to pass the installation steps in Travis build due to this. Proposing to drop support for Python2.7, what do you say guys? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#664 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACQAER3KYLKZQMLQXUN5OSDRVXZBDANCNFSM4MASPRZQ> .