This was a shocking email: the people have a Python 2 CGI script. They needed advice on Python 2 to 3 migration.
Here's my advice on a Python 2 CGI script: Throw It Away.
A great deal of the CGI processing is part of the wsgi module, as well as tools like jinja and flask. This means that the ancient Python 2 CGI script has to be disentangled into two parts.
- All the stuff that deals with CGI and HTML. This isn't valuable and must be deleted.
- Whatever additional, useful, interesting processing it does for the various user communities.
The second part -- the useful work -- needs to be preserved. The rest is junk.
With web services there are often at least three communities: the "interactive users", "analysts", and the administrators who keep it running. The names vary a lot with the problem domain. The interactive users may further decompose into anonymous visitors, people with privileges to make changes, and administrators to manage the privileges. There may be multiple flavors of analytical work based on the web transactions that are logged. A lot can go on, and each of these communities has a feature set they require.
The idea here is to look at the project as a rewrite where some of the legacy code may be preserved. It's better to proceed as though this is new development with the legacy code providing examples and test cases. If we look at this as new, we'll start with some diagrams to provide a definition of done.
Understand the user communities. Create a 4C Context Diagram to show who the users are and what the expect. Ideally, it's small with "users" and "administrators." It may turn out to be big with complex privilege rules to segregate users.
It's hard to get this right. Everyone wants the code "converted". But no one really knows all the things the code does. There's a lot of pressure to ignore this step.
This step creates the definition of done. Without this, there's no way to do anything with the CGI code and make sure that the original features still work.
Create a 4C Container Diagram showing the Apache HTTPD (or whatever server you're using) that fires the CGI. Document all other ancillary things are going on. Ideally, there's nothing. Ideally, this is a minor, stand-alone server that no one noticed until today. Label this picture "As Is." It will change, but you need a checklist of what's running right now.
(This should be very quick to produce. If it's not, go back to step one and make sure you really understand the context.)
Create a 4C Component Diagram, and label it "As Is". This has all the parts of your code base. Be sure you locate all the things in the local site-packages directory that were added onto Python. Ideally, there isn't much, but -- of course -- there could be dozens of add-on libraries.
You will have several lists. One list has all the things in site-packages. If the
PYTHONPATH environment variable is used, all the things in the directories named in this environment variable. Plus. All the things named in
These lists should overlap. Of course someone can install a package that's not used, so the site-packages list should be a superset of the import list.
This is a checklist of things that must be read (and possibly converted) to build the new features.
You'll need two suites of fully automated tests.
- Unit tests for the Python code. This must have 100% code coverage and will not be easy.
- Integration tests for the CGI. You will be using the WSGI module instead of Apache HTTPD (or whatever the server was) for this testing. You will NOT integrate with the original web server, because, that interface is no longer supported and is a security nightmare.
Let's break this into two steps.
You need automated unit tests. You need to reach at last 100% code coverage for the unit tests. This is going to be difficult for two reasons. First, the legacy code may not be easy to read or test. Second, Python 2 testing tools are no longer well supported. Many of them still work, but if you encounter problems, the tool will never be fixed.
If you can find a Python 2 version of coverage, and a Python 2 version of pytest, I suggest using this combination to write a test suite, and make sure you have 100% code coverage.
This is a lot of work, and there's no way around it. Without automated testing, there's no way to prove that you're done and the software can be trusted in production.
You will find bugs. Don't fix them now. Log them by marking the test case with the proper answer different from the answer you're getting.
Python has a built-in CGI server you can use. See https://docs.python.org/3/library/http.server.html#http.server.CGIHTTPRequestHandler for a handler that will provide core CGI features from a Python script allowing you to test without the overhead of Apache httpd or some other server.
You need an integration test suite for each user stories in the context you created in Step One. No exceptions. Each User. Each Story. A test to show that it works.
You'll likely want to use the CGIHTTPRequestHandler class in the http.server module to create a test server. You'll then create a pytest fixture that starts the web server before a test and then kills the process after the test. It's very important to use subprocess.Popen() to start and stop the target server to be sure the CGI interface works correctly.
It is common to find bugs. Don't fix them now. Log them by marking the test case with the proper answer different from the answer you're getting.
Refactor. Now that you have automated tests to prove the legacy CGI script really works, you need to disentangle the Python code into three distinct components.
- A Component to parse the request: the methods, cookies, headers, and URL.
- A Component that does useful work. This corresponds to the "model" and "control" part of the MVC design pattern.
- A Component that builds the response: the status, headers, and content.
In many CGI scripts, there is often a hopeless jumble of bad code. Because you have tests in Step Four and Step Five, you can refactor and confirm the tests still pass.
If the code is already nicely structured, this step is easy. Don't plan on it being easy.
One goal is to eventually replace HTML page output creation with jinja. Similarly, another goal is to eventually replace parsing the request with flask. All of the remaining CGI-related features get pushed into a wsgi-compatible plug-in to a web server.
The component that does the useful work will have some underlying data model (resources, files, downloads, computations, something) and some control (post, get, different paths, queries.) We'd like to clean this up, too. For now, it can be one module.
After refactoring, you'll have a new working application. You'll have a new top-level CGI script that uses the built-in wsgi module to do request and response processing. This is temporary, but is required to pass the integration test suite.
You may want to create an intermediate Component diagram to describe the new structure of the code.
Write an OpenAPI specification for the revised application. See https://swagger.io/specification/ for more information. Add the path processing so openapi.json (or openapi.yaml) will produce the specification. This means updating unit and integration tests to add this feature.
While this is new development, it is absolutely essential for building any kind of web service. It will implement the Context diagram, and most of the Container diagram. It will describe significant portions of the Component diagram, also. It is not optional. It's very likely this was not part of the legacy application.
Some of the document structures described in the OpenAPI specification will be based on the data model and control components factored out of the legacy code. It's essential to get these details write in the OpenAPI specification and the unit tests.
This may expose problems in the CGI's legacy behavior. Don't fix it now. Instead document the features that don't fit with modern API's. Don't be afraid to use # TODO comments to show what should be fixed.
Use the 2to3 tool to convert ONLY the model and control components. Do not convert request parsing and response processing components; they will be discarded. This may involve additional redesign and rewrites depending on how bad the old code was.
Convert the unit tests for ONLY the model and control components components.
Get the unit tests for the model and control to work in Python 3. This is the foundation for the new web site. Update the C4 container, component, and code diagrams. Since there's no request handling or HTML processing, don't worry about code coverage for the project as a whole. Only get the model and control to have 100% coverage.
Do not start writing view functions or HTML templates until underlying model and control module works. This is the foundation of the application. It is not tied to HTTP, but must exist and be tested independently.
Using Flask as a framework and the OpenAPI specification for the web application, build the view functions to exercise all the features of the application. Build Jinja templates for the HTML output. Use proper cookie management from Flask, discarding any legacy cookie management from the CGI. Use proper header parsing rules in Flask, discarding any legacy header processing.
Rewrite the remaining unit tests manually. These unit tests will now use the Flask test client. The goal is to get back to 100% code coverage.
Update the C4 container, component, and code diagrams.
There are untold number of ways to deploy a Flask application. Pick something simple and secure. Do some test deployments to be sure you understand how this works. As one example, you can continue to use Apache httpd. As another example, some people prefer GUnicorn, others prefer to use NGINX. There's lots of advice in the Flask project on ways to deploy Flask applications.
Do not reuse the Apache httpd and CGI interface. This was terrible.
Create a pyproject.toml file that includes a tox section so that you have a fully-automated integration capability. You can automate the CI/CD pipeline. Once the new app is in production, you can archive the old code and never use it again for anything. Ever.
Fix the bugs you found in Steps Four, Five, and Seven. You will be creating a new release with new, improved features.
This is a lot of work. There's no real alternative. CGI scripts need a lot of rework.