Skip to content

[ENH][mdac] Demonstrate and test how to give per-tenant exclusions. #4639

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 28, 2025

Conversation

rescrv
Copy link
Contributor

@rescrv rescrv commented May 28, 2025

Description of changes

This is a test of functionality we will soon rely upon.

Test plan

Tested locally; will test in CI.

  • Tests pass locally with pytest for python, yarn test for js, cargo test for rust

Documentation Changes

N/A

Copy link
Contributor

propel-code-bot bot commented May 28, 2025

This PR introduces a new unit test to the Scorecard module, demonstrating and validating support for per-tenant exclusion via pattern-based rules. The test checks that tenant-specific limits override the generic multi-tenant case, ensuring correct quota enforcement according to matching rule order.

This summary was automatically generated by @propel-code-bot

Copy link

Reviewer Checklist

Please leverage this checklist to ensure your code review is thorough before approving

Testing, Bugs, Errors, Logs, Documentation

  • Can you think of any use case in which the code does not behave as intended? Have they been tested?
  • Can you think of any inputs or external events that could break the code? Is user input validated and safe? Have they been tested?
  • If appropriate, are there adequate property based tests?
  • If appropriate, are there adequate unit tests?
  • Should any logging, debugging, tracing information be added or removed?
  • Are error messages user-friendly?
  • Have all documentation changes needed been made?
  • Have all non-obvious changes been commented?

System Compatibility

  • Are there any potential impacts on other parts of the system or backward compatibility?
  • Does this change intersect with any items on our roadmap, and if so, is there a plan for fitting them together?

Quality

  • Is this code of a unexpectedly high quality (Readability, Modularity, Intuitiveness)

@rescrv rescrv merged commit 75c1a0a into main May 28, 2025
71 checks passed
@rescrv rescrv deleted the rescrv/mdac branch May 28, 2025 17:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant