chore: swap out deprecated datetime's utcnow and utcfromtimestamp

[wantsui]

See #11608 and #11497.

Starting with Python 3.12, there were changes to datetime:

datetime: datetime.datetime’s utcnow() and utcfromtimestamp() are deprecated and will be removed in a future version. Instead, use timezone-aware objects to represent datetimes in UTC: respectively, call now() and fromtimestamp() with the tz parameter set to datetime.UTC. (Contributed by Paul Ganssle in gh-103857.)

The result is that the usage of utcnow and utcfromtimestamp now throw deprecation warnings when used, ie:

DeprecationWarning: datetime.datetime.utcfromtimestamp() is deprecated and scheduled for removal in a future version. Use timezone-aware objects to represent datetimes in UTC: datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(timestamp, datetime.UTC).

There's a difference of +00:00 between the old version and the new format.

For utcnow -> now

• datetime.datetime.utcnow().isoformat() | '2025-01-02T19:51:32.579733'
• datetime.datetime.now(datetime.timezone.utc).isoformat() | '2025-01-02T19:51:02.275232+00:00'

For utcfromtimestamp -> fromtimestamp

Assume that end_time_ns=1735848645000000000:

• (datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(end_time_ns / 1e9, tz=datetime.timezone.utc).replace(microsecond=0).isoformat() + "Z")
  • returns '2025-01-02T20:10:45+00:00Z'
• (datetime.datetime.utcfromtimestamp(end_time_ns / 1e9).replace(microsecond=0).isoformat() + "Z")
  • returns '2025-01-02T20:10:45Z'

As a result, I attempted remove the trailing ones to be consistent with the old format, but can bring it back.

Checklist

• PR author has checked that all the criteria below are met
• The PR description includes an overview of the change
• The PR description articulates the motivation for the change
• The change includes tests OR the PR description describes a testing strategy
• The PR description notes risks associated with the change, if any
• Newly-added code is easy to change
• The change follows the library release note guidelines
• The change includes or references documentation updates if necessary
• Backport labels are set (if applicable)

Reviewer Checklist

• Reviewer has checked that all the criteria below are met
• Title is accurate
• All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
• Avoids breaking API changes
• Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks
• Newly-added code is easy to change
• Release note makes sense to a user of the library
• If necessary, author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment
• Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the release branch maintenance policy

[github-actions]

CODEOWNERS have been resolved as:

ddtrace/internal/debug.py                                               @DataDog/apm-core-python
ddtrace/profiling/exporter/http.py                                      @DataDog/profiling-python
tests/appsec/iast_packages/packages/pkg_pyjwt.py                        @DataDog/asm-python

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2025-01-09 17:35:48

Comparing candidate commit 264fcd5 in PR branch wantsui/changedatetime with baseline commit 35fe7b5 in branch main.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 346 metrics, 2 unstable metrics.

[nsrip-dd]

Looks good for profiling. Timestamps are consistent with what we had before. Thanks!

[datadog-dd-trace-py-rkomorn]

Datadog Report

Branch report: wantsui/changedatetime
Commit report: 264fcd5
Test service: dd-trace-py

✅ 0 Failed, 87 Passed, 1468 Skipped, 4m 1.45s Total duration (35m 33.76s time saved)