sopel: move deprecated() to sopel.lifecycle

[Exirel]

Description

The deprecated() function is used everywhere, whenever we need to deprecate something. Sometimes, that somethings is right where this function is defined: in sopel.tools, causing cyclic import errors.

In an effort to reduce cyclic import errors, and to organize the code a bit better (mostly by removing everything from sopel/tools/__init__.py), this function is moved to its own sopel's submodule: sopel.lifecycle.

Documentation has been updated accordingly, and every part of Sopel that used sopel.tools.deprecated is now using sopel.lifecycle.deprecated.

In order to prevent yet another cyclic import error, deprecated no longer uses sopel.tools.get_logger to get the logger for an external plugins (that isn't using the namespace), but tries to mimic its behavior for namespace plugins only.

Edit: After discussion, I moved from sopel.deprecated to sopel.lifecycle. This module can be used, in the future to manage more version & lifecycle related things. But for now, I'd rather see this merged than trying to do too much and be frustrated because I've other things in mind that are blocked by this change.

Checklist

• I have read CONTRIBUTING.md
• I can and do license this contribution under the EFLv2
• No issues are reported by make qa (runs make quality and make test)
• I have tested the functionality of the things this change touches

[dgw]

I've had another thought since we talked about this, regarding the new module name. What if we called it instead sopel.lifecycle?

At the very least, that makes more sense as a title for the doc page, and it means we could have other API lifecycle stuff in there later. Fancy a decorator for alerting users to planned function signature changes, for example? (That's a quick idea, so don't judge it too hard. 😝)

If you don't like this idea, see line notes for how to improve the docs for how things are in the PR at present.

[dgw]

I'm still looking for a general reaction to calling this module sopel.lifecycle or something else like that.

[Exirel]

Hm. Lifecycle could be interesting if we want to add subclass of Warning to be used with Python's warning system, subclasses that could be turned into exception via en env var if we wanted to (like when running test to see what must disappear).

Well, I guess it's time for me to think about that a bit more.

[Exirel]

Rebased & squashed because conflicts, and then I moved to sopel.lifecycle. I don't think I can come up with a better name, and the prospect of managing version and lifecycle related things into that module is very interesting. So let's go!

[dgw]

Why does it feel like I didn't even look at the code before? Maybe you changed some of this stuff in the rename from sopel.deprecated to sopel.lifecycle, idk.

Also note, you'll want to either squash the second "renale" commit or fix that spelling error. 😸

[Exirel]

Yup yup applied & fixed. No rebase nor squash yet, of course.

[dgw]

Time to squash. Really wish there was a "squash" emoji; either the food or the sport would do.