OK, let me know if you need anything else from me, or if you have any questions. Thanks again!

@aleksihakli thanks for all of the help. Is there any outstanding task that are waiting for me or that I need to do at this point?

This adds the initial Sphinx shims so that Read the Docs can generate a documentation site.

Further setup is required for the actual content, this PR only aims to setup correct infrastructure for building the docs.

Fixes #139 Relates #138

As indicated in #121 and #138 a Read the Docs page and integration would be nice for the repository. Initial integration can be done with sphinx-quickstart.

@kencochrane is probably the best person for creating the initial Read the Docs page as the maintainer, and adding the Jazzband bot into the project, and after that we can set up the documentation pipeline and webhooks.

The project can be imported into RTD here (manual import probably works best):

https://readthedocs.org/dashboard/import/

The docs need a version tag that is tied to the repository as well as a Python version set up. It would probably be nice to set the documentation target up as Python 3, as the official Python 2.7 deprecation is coming up in just a month?

@aleksihakli yeah that sounds good, automating deployments would be great.

merging since the checks that failed are unrelated to the README file changes.

• Remove non-functional Landscape.io badge (site is unreachable)
• Add Jazzband badge
• Update title styling
• Update code examples for Django version compatibility

Thank you @aleksihakli and @jezdez

Hello, @aleksihakli has suggested that I move https://github.com/kencochrane/django-defender/ over to Jazzband, and this issue is to discuss if you are interested in accepting the project.

This discussion originated here: https://github.com/kencochrane/django-defender/issues/121

I looked over the guidelines and they look good, and the project has most of the requirements already and only needs a few changes before it can be moved over.

• Move docs from README to sphinx docs and setup ReadTheDocs integration
• Add a contributors file to the repo.

If you decide to accept django-defender then we can look at making the required changes.

Let me know if you have any questions.

I transferred over the repo, I'll close this issue since it is complete, and we can work off the new issue that was auto-created in the defender repo.

@jezdez Thank you, and I understand about being super busy, so no worries there. I just transferred the repo over to jazzband, so step 1 is done. a few more to go :)

@jezdez thank you!

@aleksihakli I haven't seen any progress on the issue I created on the jazzband-roadies repo. Is it normal that no news is good news, or should there be a formal acceptance before I move forward?

It looks like a few things that we need to do before we can move are create some sphinx docs, setup read the docs integration and then add a contributors file. If you can help with any of those, that would be great.

@aleksihakli thanks, I submitted the issue, let's see what they say.

Hello, @aleksihakli has suggested that I move https://github.com/kencochrane/django-defender/ over to Jazzband, and this issue is to discuss if you are interested in accepting the project.

This discussion originated here: https://github.com/kencochrane/django-defender/issues/121

I looked over the guidelines and they look good, and the project has most of the requirements already and only needs a few changes before it can be moved over.

• Move docs from README to sphinx docs and setup ReadTheDocs integration
• Add a contributors file to the repo.

If you decide to accept django-defender then we can look at making the required changes.

Let me know if you have any questions.

@aleksihakli sounds good, do you want to create the ticket on the jazzband help, or should I?

@aleksihakli and @jezdez Thanks for the info, I reviewed the guidelines and I think we are a good fit. The only thing that we don't have right now is a CONTRIBUTING.md file which we will have to create and add. Our docs right now are just a big README file, if we need to make that more formal, that would require a little bit of work. The release process seems fine as well.

At this point would I need to fix the outstanding issues now before we transfer, or after the transfer is complete? Should we create a ticket to discuss this before we move forward with a transfer?

OK, I have joined the jazzband github org, should I transfer the project now, or wait?

Sorry for the delay, work has been busy. I'm OK with moving it over to jazzband. I guess we just need to go over what we need to do. I'm guessing step one would be to move the project in github, and then we can go from there?

To be honest I'm not sure. What do others think? Would that mean we shut down defender and tell people to move to axes?

You would need to use the TTL command on Redis to get the Time left for the block for the given Redis key. Either IP or username.

Then you need to add the value to the template context here: https://github.com/kencochrane/django-defender/blob/ce95906488676a44cebd34262426a21303d5dead/defender/utils.py#L293

Which is called in this method here: https://github.com/kencochrane/django-defender/blob/2251c298a9904ad13d69b711ef939dd6b54f84b1/defender/decorators.py#L22 and here https://github.com/kencochrane/django-defender/blob/2251c298a9904ad13d69b711ef939dd6b54f84b1/defender/decorators.py#L52

currently utils.lockout_response doesn't take that parameter so you would need an update so that it passes in the time left parameter

To keep things simple you could change is_already_locked to return if it is already locked and if so the TTL for the item.

One thing to consider is that someone can be blocked by the IP or the username, so you would need to return the one that has the highest value because they won't be allowed through until both of them are no longer blocking.

When blocking a user a signal is send in defender/utils.py:block_username https://github.com/kencochrane/django-defender/blob/master/defender/utils.py#L197

However, this happens on every call of defender/utils.py:record_failed_attemp in https://github.com/kencochrane/django-defender/blob/master/defender/utils.py#L218 even though the user was already blocked before.

For instance, I want to send an email informing the user (if present) that she was blocked and this results into an email for each blocked login.

Is this on purpose?

completed with #137 thanks @horida and @williamboman

Only send the username/IP blocked signal if the user/IP is actually blocked.

Like this multiple sending of the signal is avoid. The block is set even though to avoid race conditions. There is still a slight chance the signal is send twice, but that should be OK.

Are you asking how to get the value, or if it is available? I don't think it is currently available, there would need to be a code change to expose that.

Add signals send when a username or an ip is unblocked.

@horida good question, I would suspect that we only need it the first time, but I'm not sure if there is a use case where someone wants to know every time.

@williamboman wrote that functionality, so let's ask them. @williamboman do you see any issue if we only send the blocking signal when it is blocked and not after every invalid login?

Maybe we need to have a different signal for invalid login that happens every time, and then only trigger the blocked username/ip when it is blocked.

Open to ideas/suggestions.

LGTM, thank you.