Mentor Model

[virajchandra51]

Fixes #18

Description

Include a summary of the change and relevant motivation/context. List any dependencies that are required for this change.

Type of Change: (Delete irrelevant options)

• Code

How Has This Been Tested?

Describe the tests you ran to verify your changes. Provide instructions or GIFs so we can reproduce. List any relevant details for your test.

Checklist:

• [x] My PR follows the style guidelines of this project
• [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code or materials
• [ ] I have commented my code or provided relevant documentation, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• [ ] Any dependent changes have been merged
• [ ] Update Swagger documentation and the exported file at /docs folder
• [ ] Update requirements.txt

Code/Quality Assurance

• [x] My changes generate no new warnings
• [ ] My PR currently breaks something (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
• [ ] Any dependent changes have been published in downstream modules

[virajchandra51]

Added All required Changes, except the default image. Please review the other stuff that was required. (PS - closed my last pull request by mistake, changes were - an abstract user and semester and branch choices to user)

[prakhar-asaiya]

LGTM. @sahil9001 review it once.

[ayushgoswamiabr]

Change codechef id, codeforces id, leetcode id, gfg id, hackerrank id, linkedin id to urlfields

[virajchandra51]

Change codechef id, codeforces id, leetcode id, gfg id, hackerrank id, linkedin id to urlfields

Done @ayushgoswamiabr

[sahil9001]

Why .github/pull_request_template.md is removed? Unnecessary change, add it back

[virajchandra51]

@ayushgoswamiabr @sahil9001 All changes are done

[sahil9001]

LGTM, @ayushgoswamiabr please verify changes locally. Then we can have approval.

[ayushgoswamiabr]

@sahil9001 I have verified the changes locally there is no error just I think it would be better if phone number was an integer field with max value 9999999999 otherwise we would need checks to verify if user hasn't mistakenly entered characters in phone number

[sahil9001]

@sahil9001 I have verified the changes locally there is no error just I think it would be better if phone number was an integer field with max value 9999999999 otherwise we would need checks to verify if user hasn't mistakenly entered characters in phone number

Integers that big aren't supported yet, we prefer CharField

[ayushgoswamiabr]

Ok

[virajchandra51]

are any changes required sir? @ayushgoswamiabr

[ayushgoswamiabr]

No