Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feat: Upgrade django-oscar to version 3.2 #4023

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 24, 2023

Conversation

zubair-ce07
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Changes related to upgrade ecommerce application to django-oscar version 3.2 from 2.2

Required Testing

Thoroughly test ecommerce dashboard. (Every flow needs to be tested)

Supporting information

Link to other information about the change, such as Jira issues, GitHub issues, or Discourse discussions.
Be sure to check they are publicly readable, or if not, repeat the information here.

Other information

Ticket: https://2u-internal.atlassian.net/browse/REV-3639

@zubair-ce07 zubair-ce07 requested a review from a team as a code owner August 31, 2023 12:51
Copy link
Contributor

@julianajlk julianajlk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for doing this work! Question - are the template changes included in this PR part of the upgrade? Were you able to see the changes locally/do they make sense?

@christopappas
Copy link
Contributor

i see that the tests are failing with somenthing related to option.OPTIONAL

not sure if you've been digging into this yet, but, in my local ecommerce i see OPTIONAL as an attribute of the AbstactOption class

root@ecommerce:/edx/app/ecommerce/ecommerce# grep 'AbstractOption' -A 35  /edx/app/ecommerce/venvs/ecommerce/lib/python3.8/site-packages/oscar/apps/catalogue/abstract_models.py 
class AbstractOption(models.Model):
    """
    An option that can be selected for a particular item when the product
    is added to the basket.

    For example,  a list ID for an SMS message send, or a personalised message
    to print on a T-shirt.

    This is not the same as an 'attribute' as options do not have a fixed value
    for a particular item.  Instead, option need to be specified by a customer
    when they add the item to their basket.
    """
    name = models.CharField(_("Name"), max_length=128)
    code = AutoSlugField(_("Code"), max_length=128, unique=True,
                         populate_from='name')

    REQUIRED, OPTIONAL = ('Required', 'Optional')

looks like optional was deleted in this commit: django-oscar/django-oscar@dd5a151#diff-6101f645bcf6dd2482680b01d02acf8a6010004e7a7730a9513e9cdc41165aff

i think for backwards compatibility, we may want to add OPTIONAL with text of 'Optional' to https://github.com/openedx/ecommerce/blob/master/ecommerce/extensions/catalogue/models.py#L179

@zubair-ce07
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for doing this work! Question - are the template changes included in this PR part of the upgrade? Were you able to see the changes locally/do they make sense?

Yes Otherwise whole pages alignment were out of order. We need to upgrade template pages as per new upgraded version.

@@ -32,5 +32,35 @@ class Migration(migrations.Migration):
]

operations = [
migrations.AddField(
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

was this the old migration we're adding to? why do we need to do this? this seems odd to me... i'm worried that changing a migration that has already been applied 1) would not have any effect 2) break the application of migrations

@@ -537,8 +537,9 @@ def create_new_voucher(code, end_datetime, name, start_datetime, voucher_type):
if not isinstance(end_datetime, datetime.datetime):
end_datetime = dateutil.parser.parse(end_datetime)

name = name[:128 - len(voucher_code)] + voucher_code
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nice

Copy link
Contributor

@christopappas christopappas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for all this work Zubair. Before I 👍 , I'd like to understand the update to the old migration file and why that is necessary

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
# Generated by Django 3.2.20 on 2023-08-24 10:28
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

so it's definitely weird that this migration and other other one are not gettign covered by codecov. these were also made a few months back. i wonder if there's somtehing about changes we have made along the way that has prevented these migrations from being relevant? i honestly am not sure. if we delete this migrations from you branch, re run makemigrations, and these appear again , and then you push them up this branch and we still see this coverage issue, then i think it might be fine. i just want to make sure there isn't anything extra that was created along the way that is no longer relevant 🤷 -- honestly though, i'm not certain why this is the case

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this is the case for so many of the migrations 🤔 -- that's so odd...

@@ -4,21 +4,20 @@
from django.db import migrations, models
from oscar.core.loading import get_model

Option = get_model('catalogue', 'Option')
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

was this change still necessary based on the latest approach you described?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hy @christopappas. Yes this is necessary otherwise it will load the latest Option model (One created after running all the migrations) giving error "required field is not defined" because at this point required column is not created in our db.

@christopappas
Copy link
Contributor

you may need to squash your commits btw. looks like there's a commitlint error

Copy link
Contributor

@christopappas christopappas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

i'm giving you a 👍 because i think you have done enough due diligence and QA here so far. if none of the most recent comments I make you feel like something to change, and if you are comfortable with the stage of this, i would like to see us merge this and test extensively on stage 🚀

@zubair-ce07 zubair-ce07 merged commit 4d275df into master Oct 24, 2023
8 of 10 checks passed
@zubair-ce07 zubair-ce07 deleted the zubair-django-oscar-upgrade branch October 24, 2023 08:17
zubair-ce07 added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 24, 2023
christopappas pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 24, 2023
christopappas pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2023
* feat: changes to upgrad django-oscar to version 3.2

* chore: upgraded django oscar to version 3.2
christopappas pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants