The general approach is to do multiple migrations (add first and make new-code work with both, deploy, remove old-code, then delete old-schema) and this is not specific to Django's ORM in any way, the same goes for any database schema deployment. Take a peek at https://medium.com/@pranavdixit20/zero-downtime-migrations-i... for some ideas.
I still feel like Swift 5 (5.2?) was the sweet spot. Right now there are just way too many keywords, making C++ look easy again.
Similarly, I find Combine / GCD code far easier to write and read and understand, and the semantics are better than structured concurrency. I have plenty of production Combine code in use by (hundreds of) millions of people and it hasn't needed to be touched in years.
I wrote a hacky version of SKIP LOCKED using advisory locks and a recursive CTE before it was released for a job queue. It worked splendidly, along with the transactional semantics of a proper database. I’m surprised more systems don’t realize they need it.
Oh how I miss the computer labs with Kidpix, Oregon trail, Mavis Beacon, and maybe later Marathon LAN parties (when the instructor left the room for an hour)...
Even in a private monorepo, Google has tools like Copybara that make it somewhat easy to 'open source' small pieces of it and sync them in and out of a 'public' repo. The benefits of a monorepo and just having to 'git checkout' and your entire environment 'just works' (I'm looking at you, scripting languages and build systems) is not to be taken lightly.
I am fine with applying either OO / FP approaches. This example is a sealed class, it is just my opinion that the OO version reads better. And the added benefit of having the function namespaced / bound to the class for IDE support (autocomplete) and documentation.
Thanks. I'm just wondering why the example didn't show this extension method. It seems more idiomatic to just call it on the receiver instead of passing a parameter.