[question] Template loader order

[asmodehn]

I noticed the order of template loader in controller tests project is:

TEMPLATES = [
    {
        "BACKEND": "django.template.backends.django.DjangoTemplates",
        "OPTIONS": {
            "loaders": [
                "django.template.loaders.filesystem.Loader",
                "openwisp_utils.loaders.DependencyLoader",
                "django.template.loaders.app_directories.Loader",
            ],

Same in notifications or users :

TEMPLATES = [
    {
        "BACKEND": "django.template.backends.django.DjangoTemplates",
        "DIRS": [
            os.path.join(os.path.dirname(BASE_DIR), "openwisp_users", "templates")
        ],
        "OPTIONS": {
            "loaders": [
                "django.template.loaders.filesystem.Loader",
                "openwisp_utils.loaders.DependencyLoader",
                "django.template.loaders.app_directories.Loader",
            ],

However, in monitoring we have :

TEMPLATES = [
    {
        "BACKEND": "django.template.backends.django.DjangoTemplates",
        "DIRS": [os.path.join(os.path.dirname(BASE_DIR), "templates")],
        "OPTIONS": {
            "loaders": [
                "django.template.loaders.filesystem.Loader",
                "django.template.loaders.app_directories.Loader",
                "openwisp_utils.loaders.DependencyLoader",
            ],

and in firmware-upgrader:

TEMPLATES = [
    {
        "BACKEND": "django.template.backends.django.DjangoTemplates",
        "DIRS": [os.path.join(os.path.dirname(BASE_DIR), "templates")],
        "OPTIONS": {
            "loaders": [
                "django.template.loaders.filesystem.Loader",
                "django.template.loaders.app_directories.Loader",
                "openwisp_utils.loaders.DependencyLoader",
            ],

I believe this is hiding issues with templates when extending openwisp apps, and should eventually be addressed.
Am I correct to assume that the order in users, notifications and controller is the wrong one and should be fixed ?

[nemesifier]

@asmodehn thanks for bringing that up, according to the DependencyLoader docs you're right, but right now I am not 100% sure if the wrong order is accidental or is the result of a deliberate change, let's double check the history and if all tests pass and no other problems appear we should fix that.

This kind of problem would be very much alleviated if we get a chance to work on a solution for openwisp/openwisp-utils#408.