Add alternate accounts to the user model

[jchristgit]

Introduce a way to store alternate accounts on the user, and add the PATCH /bot/users/<id:str>/alts endpoint, which allows updating the user's alt accounts to the alt accounts in the request..

[netlify]

❌ Deploy Preview for pydis-static failed.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	447ce10
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/pydis-static/deploys/664adc7f918b20000845d9f0

[coveralls]

coverage: 100.0%. remained the same
when pulling 447ce10 on user-alts
into 350c2b7 on main.

[MarkKoz]

Why are we making this design decision over allowing direct updates on the existing users endpoint?

[ChrisLovering]

As a client the bot would need to fetch the user, edit the list of alts, then send back the updated list to site.

Since that's not an atomic change, we could lose data if two actions were preformed on the same user at the same time.

This approach means that each action is preformed atomically by site

[MarkKoz]

Can we not support a partial update? We only need to update the alts field, not the entire user.

[jchristgit]

Strictly speaking this line doesn't do anything at all, because from my
testing DRF already doesn't allow editing the field over the regular
patch endpoint - it just ignores whatever you give it. The
frozen_fields therefore serve more of a documentary purpose than
actually changing anything. I haven't found a way to enable this in
DRF...

[jb3]

All looks good, only thing I've noticed is we store user display name but it looks missing from a lot of this.

It looks like the missing serialisation here was already present but maybe it should be added in now?

[jb3]

Oh just noticed the PR age, the serialisation might be present in main then.

[jchristgit]

Migrations are merged, display_name was added, please re-review.

[jb3]

I may misunderstand Django migrations and this may be a non-issue, but do we need to update the dependencies of the 0093_user_alts migration to instead depend on 0095_user_display_name (which should be the most recent migration)

[jchristgit]

@jb3

I may misunderstand Django migrations and this may be a non-issue, but do we need to update the dependencies of the 0093_user_alts migration to instead depend on 0095_user_display_name (which should be the most recent migration)

We do not. The merged migration takes care of resolving conflicts.