Update user registration flow to support new backend auth endpoints

[lpatmo]

Context

Note: work on this issue after codebuddies/backend#187 is merged in. That PR rewrote the auth to use a more up-to-date auth package that supports email verification, an important step we didn't support before.

First, let me try registering a new user:
POST /api/v1/auth/registration/
{
"username": "linda",
"email": "[email protected]",
"password1": "uniquepassword",
"password2": "uniquepassword"
}

I'll get a 201 Response:
{
"detail": "Verification e-mail sent."
}

If I login without verifying the email, I'll get the following 400 response:
POST /api/v1/auth/login/
{
"username": "",
"email": "",
"password": ""
}

HTTP 400 Bad Request
Allow: POST, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
"non_field_errors": [
"E-mail is not verified."
]
}

When the verification email is sent, it'll contain a link that looks something like:
http://localhost:8000/api/v1/auth/registration/verify-email/?key=

On the FE app, we'll need to create a page with the route /api/v1/auth/registration/verify-email/?key=

and make a POST request sending the key:

POST /api/v1/auth/registration/verify-email/
{
"key":
}

This will validate the email address.

Source: codebuddies/backend#191

How to log out:
POST api/v1/auth/logout

How to view the details of a currently-logged-in user
GET api/v1/auth/user

GET api/v1/auth/current_user //without email address

Acceptance criteria

[ ] Update the POST request when a user registers to hit POST /api/v1/auth/registration/
[ ] Remove the first name and last name fields
[ ] Change the login endpoint to be POST /api/v1/auth/login/
[ ] Change the logout endpoint to be POST api/v1/auth/logout
[ ] Create a api/v1/auth/registration/verify-email?key={KEY} page that upon load, makes a POST request to /verify-email and passes in the key from the params in the URL

POST /api/v1/auth/registration/verify-email/
{
    "key": <KEY>
}

[peoray]

PR has been merged. Is this available?

[lpatmo]

@peoray Here's a rough draft of the PR: #163

This will need to be rebased when the folder restructuring happens, though! In the meantime, feel free to poke around the branch from that draft PR. :) Let me know if you have questions!

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[pdotsani]

Is this still available? Not sure if @peoray still wanted to take it.

[peoray]

@pdotsani Yeah, I'm still active on this. If you want, we can pair and work on it together

[pdotsani]

Sounds good! Are you on slack? I think I pinged you...

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[BethanyG]

@peoray @pdotsani -- is this still in progress, or should we be closing it? Pls LMK. Thanks!

[pdotsani]

Hi @BethanyG - It's still in progress. @peoray and I are about halfway done. We're planing to work on it next weekend.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[BethanyG]

@pdotsani -- the stale bot has come for this again. I think commenting on it will be sufficient to keep it open....but thought I'd ping you just in case.

[pdotsani]

@BethanyG 👍

[BethanyG]

Actually, it closed it. 😢 Reopening.

[angelocordon]

Isn't there a tag we can use that makes stalebot ignore issues?

[BethanyG]

@angelocordon - maybe - If there is, I don't have time at the moment to find it. For the backend, we review and then remove the stale flag for issues that get marked stale. I only noticed this for frontend because I got a note it was closed b/c its linked to a backend issue I was working on.