Replace channels_info with conversations_info

[repudi8or]

As of slack-machine v0.20 release i am getting :-
[2020-07-23 01:23:44][ERROR] slack.rtm.client client.py:_dispatch_event:505 | When calling '#_on_channel_created()' in the 'machine.clients.singletons.slack' module the following error was raised: The request to the Slack API failed.
The server responded with: {'ok': False, 'error': 'method_deprecated', 'response_metadata': {'messages': ['[ERROR] This method is retired and can no longer be used. Please use conversations.info instead. Learn more: https://api.slack.com/changelog/2020-01-deprecating-antecedents-to-the-conversations-api.']}}

This PR moves the calls from channels_info to conversations_info and makes a bunch of model fields optional that slack does not return in some cases

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #386 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 83.33%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #386   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   76.09%   76.09%           
=======================================
  Files          23       23           
  Lines         916      916           
=======================================
  Hits          697      697           
  Misses        219      219           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
machine/clients/singletons/slack.py	43.00% <0.00%> (ø)
machine/models/user.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 13b4563...15563d1. Read the comment docs.

[DonDebonair]

Huh, that's interesting. I've actually tested v0.20 yesterday, thoroughly. I have a sort of manual test procedure with a bunch of test-plugins that I run through on a Slack workspace created specifically for testing Slack Machine. These issues didn't come up.
The only thing I can think of is that Slack lets different workspaces use different versions of their API, based on the token.

In any case, thanks, I wil merge it now and cut a release later today.

[repudi8or]

Are you ok with contributions in that manner (via PR from my fork)? There have been a few issues that i have commented on, and waited for your fix, although i could have done so and saved you the effort. Im building some things that are close to the feature requests others have made so if thats cool, i will just keep following that PR process. Rep

…

On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 6:21 PM Daan Debie ***@***.***> wrote: Merged #386 <#386> into master. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#386 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABBNZH6Q3KEIVF7NZOOEYPLR47XJ3ANCNFSM4PFJ35PA> .

[DonDebonair]

v0.20.1 has been published.

[DonDebonair]

Are you ok with contributions in that manner (via PR from my fork)? There have been a few issues that i have commented on, and waited for your fix, although i could have done so and saved you the effort. Im building some things that are close to the feature requests others have made so if thats cool, i will just keep following that PR process. Rep

Absolutely! Be aware that I can be picky though, about what features I want to be in the core and not, and also about code style.
And due to limited time, it can take a while before I can review PRs. But they're very welcome!