Restructure Django apps

[jerbob]

This PR contains a bunch of sweeping changes to the project's app names and scopes. The goal here is to get rid of any redundant apps, and merge any apps whose scopes intersect.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #119 (b801294) into master (35b9f20) will decrease coverage by 0.05%.
The diff coverage is 97.77%.

❗ Current head b801294 differs from pull request most recent head d2a33d0. Consider uploading reports for the commit d2a33d0 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #119      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   94.40%   94.35%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files         107      106       -1     
  Lines        4754     4623     -131     
  Branches      272      251      -21     
==========================================
- Hits         4488     4362     -126     
+ Misses        223      221       -2     
+ Partials       43       40       -3     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/andromeda/apps.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/andromeda/serializers.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/challenge/apps.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/challenge/signals.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/challenge/sql.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/challenge/tests/mixins.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/challenge/tests/test_utils.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/config/apps.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/config/backends.py	80.00% <ø> (-9.10%)	⬇️
src/config/config.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
... and 122 more

---

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 35b9f20...d2a33d0. Read the comment docs.

[jchristgit]

Hello @jerbob, just checking in to see how you're doing. Do you need help with this PR?

[jchristgit]

@jerbob do we need the migrations to move data over? We only ever run the app for a single event anyways.

[jchristgit]

Jeremiah,

While I highly appreciate the amount of effort that has flown into this pull
request, in its current state, it is not possible to actually review the code,
as I am plagued with local setup errors. I understand it's hard to keep a pull
request of this size in sync with the master branch, but I cannot adjust half
the project when testing it locally. I've encountered a number of issues whilst
trying to set this up:

• poetry.lock was not working properly, and caused poetry to crash with an
  error. Running poetry lock fixed it.

• After building the project in docker-compose and starting it, it crashed
  multiple times. For the following reasons, in no particular order:

  • Unexpected indents
  • Undefined imports
  • Missing migrations

• I tried to fix the missing imports by using flake8, or at least find them,
  but flake8 also crashes out with an error, I assume due to a configuration
  error:

flake8.exceptions.FailedToLoadPlugin: Flake8 failed to load plugin "pylint" due
to cannot import name 'MergedConfigParser' from 'flake8.options.config' (...).

I believe the majority of these problems is caused by the recent merge with
option -X ours. I understand it's annoying to fix a big merge conflict, but
perhaps we should roll the merge back, and try to resolve it one-by-one?

[jerbob]

Johannes,

While I highly appreciate your need to check in on unfinished "Draft" PRs
as the RACTF Principal Software Engineer, please note that this PR is
marked as a "Draft". PRs that are marked as a "Draft" are generally not yet
ready for review, which is why I've explicitly marked this PR as a "Draft"
(it is not yet ready for review). When it is ready for a review (i.e.
"Ready for review"), I will mark it as "Ready for review" which implies
that the PR in question is ready to be reviewed (it is not). You're right
that a lot of work's been put into this "Draft" PR, but it's still far from
done (i.e. a "Draft"), which is why I haven't moved it from "Draft" to
"Ready for review" just yet. I will remove this PR from "Draft" and into
"Ready for review" once the PR is viable for a code review.

Your unsolicited code review on this "Draft" (not ready for a code review)
PR is highly appreciated, but the points raised are all in reference to
aspects of this PR that will change long before I move the PR from "Draft"
(not ready for a review) to "Ready for review" (ready for a review). In
particular, issues raised by a faulty merge commit that can be rectified by
reverting and rebasing manually.

You can find out more about "Draft" pull requests in this blog post:
https://github.blog/2019-02-14-introducing-draft-pull-requests

You can find out more about the etymology of the word "Draft" here:
https://www.etymonline.com/word/draft

You can find out more about the etymology of the word "unsolicited" here:
https://www.etymonline.com/word/unsolicited

[jerbob]

As an addendum, I will click this "Ready for review" button below my
comment when the pull request is no longer a "Draft" and is ready for a
review (it is not):

Thank you for your service, and I look forward to ignoring more of your
reviews in the future.

[jchristgit]

I'm sorry, Jeremiah. I will take my review down immediately, and implement
measures to prevent this from happening in the future. I will not leave
unsolicited reviews on any Really Awesome CTF Ltd. repositories in the future,
and I will ensure that any review I leave is friendly and welcoming as opposed
to being this hostile. I apologize for my actions.

[jerbob]

Johannes,

thanks

[0xAda]

😢

[jchristgit]

As a longtime fan of the RACTF backend, I'm sad to see this go.

When I was a child, I loved learning about new developments of the RACTF
backend app restructure pull request. Whenever I returned from school, it was
the first question I wanted answered. The lack of updates was always both
interesting and sad to me, and I was always hoping for a timely update on such
an important topic.

As I grew older, my childlike fascination with the lack of updates on the pull
request grew into a more stoic lifeform, and the overall stagnation of the pull
request slowly started to affect my own life. Looking for a way to get out, I
learnt Python programming. I am sad that to this day, I have not been able to
provide any net benefit to this pull request, despite my ability to read basic
Python code and even perhaps write a bit with the help of modern assistant
tooling.

Jeremiah, thank you for all your hard work. I can understand why you've chosen
this step, and let it be known that your cries for aid in the deep trenches of
refactoring this code have not been left unheard. I can assure you that life
always finds a way.