Make Jinja2Templates.get_env private & rename

[aminalaee]

Closes #1194.

[Kludex]

@JayH5 I've been thinking about this kind of things:

Suggested change

	def _get_env(self, directory: str) -> "jinja2.Environment":
	def get_env(self, directory: str) -> "jinja2.Environment":
	warnings.warn(
	"'get_env' is deprecated. Use '_get_env' instead.",
	DeprecationWarning,
	)
	return self._get_env(directory)
	def _get_env(self, directory: str) -> "jinja2.Environment":

We did it for GraphQL, but we are in a pre-stable version, so in theory we can be aggressive and remove without adding warnings 🤔

Otherwise, we should be consistent.

[aminalaee]

I think the whole idea is to shy away from using get_env direcrly. We can change the warning to encourage using templates.env instead of templates.get_env()

[JayH5]

We definitely wouldn't want to suggest using a private method. We could say [...] Use the env attribute instead but even that is not equivalent to get_env.

If we wanted to be really careful we could rename this method to create_env and then call it from get_env with a warning like "this is deprecated, you probably want the env attribute, but if not use create_env". But, IMO, people should basically never want what get_env currently does and it's only confusing. I agree it should be removed.

[Kludex]

We definitely wouldn't want to suggest using a private method.

Yeah, I agree! I've copied the warning from another snippet. 😛

But my intention here was to bring the discussion if we should keep adding warnings in pre-1.0.

[JayH5]

Thanks for the PR. I think it might make sense to rename this method _create_env to better reflect what it's actually doing.

[aminalaee]

Renamed to _create_env

[JayH5]

Thanks!