[18.0][IMP] queue_job: avoid deprecation warning about datetime.datetime.utcnow() in _odoo_now()

[acsonefho]

datetime.datetime.utcnow() is now deprecated and should be replaced by datetime.datetime.now() (optional TZ parameter).
As the original _odoo_now() doesn't contain the Timezone, the parameter datetime.UTC is not added into this improvement to stay a naive datetime.

The purpose of _odoo_now() is to have the current datetime in UTC timezone but staying naive datetime.

https://docs.python.org/3/library/datetime.html#datetime.datetime.utcnow

https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/3.12.html#:~:text=datetime%3A%20datetime,gh%2D103857.)

Original warning:

[OCA-git-bot]

Hi @guewen,
some modules you are maintaining are being modified, check this out!

[amh-mw]

Given https://www.odoo.com/documentation/18.0/administration/on_premise/source.html#python

Odoo [18] requires Python 3.10 or later to run.

I went through the Python documentation for versions 3.10 through 3.13 and the guidance on replacing utcnow is consistent:

Warning: Because naive datetime objects are treated by many datetime methods as local times, it is preferred to use aware datetimes to represent times in UTC. As such, the recommended way to create an object representing the current time in UTC is by calling datetime.now(timezone.utc).

So shouldn't the change be

- dt = datetime.datetime.utcnow()+ dt = datetime.datetime.now(timezone.utc)

[acsonefho]

Given https://www.odoo.com/documentation/18.0/administration/on_premise/source.html#python

Odoo [18] requires Python 3.10 or later to run.

I went through the Python documentation for versions 3.10 through 3.13 and the guidance on replacing utcnow is consistent:

Warning: Because naive datetime objects are treated by many datetime methods as local times, it is preferred to use aware datetimes to represent times in UTC. As such, the recommended way to create an object representing the current time in UTC is by calling datetime.now(timezone.utc).

So shouldn't the change be

- dt = datetime.datetime.utcnow()+ dt = datetime.datetime.now(timezone.utc)

Yes but if I do that, the returned datetime contains a timezone (and others errors occurs) due to difference between datetime and naive datetime.

[sbidoul]

Yes but if I do that, the returned datetime contains a timezone (and others errors occurs) due to difference between datetime and naive datetime.

Yet dt = datetime.datetime.now() is not correct. This still needs work.

[acsonefho]

What do you think of this: datetime.datetime.now(datetime.timezone.utc).replace(tzinfo=None)

[sbidoul]

Yes, that sounds better.

[amh-mw]

LGTM

[benwillig]

LGTM

[sbidoul]

I checked that _odoo_now() does the same as SELECT EXTRACT(EPOCH FROM NOW()); in psql.

That said, so does time.time(), so this can probably be simplified.

[acsonefho]

I checked that _odoo_now() does the same as SELECT EXTRACT(EPOCH FROM NOW()); in psql.

That said, so does time.time(), so this can probably be simplified.

The current return type of _odoo_now() is datetime and time.time() is float.
That update probably needs others changes.

[FrancoMaxime]

LGTM: code review

[AnizR]

I agree with @sbidoul

We can remove the funciton _datetime_to_epoch and directly return:

Suggested change

	# Need naive datetime
	dt=datetime.datetime.now(datetime.timezone.utc).replace(tzinfo=None)
	returntime.time()

I tested localy and in fact, _odoo_now() returns a float:

>>> dt = datetime.datetime.now(datetime.timezone.utc).replace(tzinfo=None)
>>> (dt - datetime.datetime(1970, 1, 1)).total_seconds()
1757943419.659445
>>> time.time()
1757943426.0511284
>>> 

[FrancoMaxime]

I agree with @AnizR comment

[AnizR]

I agree with @sbidoul

We can remove the funciton _datetime_to_epoch and directly return:

I tested localy and in fact, _odoo_now() returns a float:

>>> dt = datetime.datetime.now(datetime.timezone.utc).replace(tzinfo=None)
>>> (dt - datetime.datetime(1970, 1, 1)).total_seconds()
1757943419.659445
>>> time.time()
1757943426.0511284
>>> 

As discussed with @acsonefho, I have done the refactor of the function _odoo_now().

[SirPyTech]

Thanks!

[sbidoul]

I'd keep the comment that says it must do the same as the postgres equivalent, though.

[AnizR]

Indeed, done 👍

[OCA-git-bot]

This PR has the approved label and has been created more than 5 days ago. It should therefore be ready to merge by a maintainer (or a PSC member if the concerned addon has no declared maintainer). 🤖

[guewen]

/ocabot merge patch

[OCA-git-bot]

Hey, thanks for contributing! Proceeding to merge this for you.
Prepared branch 18.0-ocabot-merge-pr-813-by-guewen-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

[OCA-git-bot]

It looks like something changed on 18.0 in the meantime.
Let me try again (no action is required from you).
Prepared branch 18.0-ocabot-merge-pr-813-by-guewen-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

[OCA-git-bot]

Congratulations, your PR was merged at 0a2be50. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️