Fix plan_activated_users count for an installation #132
Conversation
joseph-sentry
requested review from
dana-yaish,
giovanni-guidini,
scott-codecov and
matt-codecov
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #132 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 98.40% 98.40%
=======================================
Files 373 373
Lines 27692 27717 +25
=======================================
+ Hits 27251 27276 +25
Misses 441 441
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
This change has been scanned for critical changes. Learn more |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #132 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage ? 93.25%
=======================================
Files ? 346
Lines ? 26910
Branches ? 0
=======================================
Hits ? 25096
Misses ? 1814
Partials ? 0
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #132 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 98.44% 98.44%
=======================================
Files 347 347
Lines 27196 27221 +25
=======================================
+ Hits 26774 26799 +25
Misses 422 422
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #132 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 98.44% 98.44%
=======================================
Files 347 347
Lines 27196 27221 +25
=======================================
+ Hits 26774 26799 +25
Misses 422 422
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
| dbsession.add(org_second) | ||
| dbsession.flush() | ||
|
|
||
| encrypted_license = "wxWEJyYgIcFpi6nBSyKQZQeaQ9Eqpo3SXyUomAqQOzOFjdYB3A8fFM1rm+kOt2ehy9w95AzrQqrqfxi9HJIb2zLOMOB9tSy52OykVCzFtKPBNsXU/y5pQKOfV7iI3w9CHFh3tDwSwgjg8UsMXwQPOhrpvl2GdHpwEhFdaM2O3vY7iElFgZfk5D9E7qEnp+WysQwHKxDeKLI7jWCnBCBJLDjBJRSz0H7AfU55RQDqtTrnR+rsLDHOzJ80/VxwVYhb" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How many seats does this license allows for?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
added a comment to the code
| @@ -89,11 +88,57 @@ def test_activate_user_success_for_enterprise_pr_billing( | |||
| dbsession.commit() | |||
| assert user.ownerid in org.plan_activated_users | |||
|
|
|||
| def test_activate_user_success_user_org_overlap( | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure I understand this test case.
I looks like you are creating 2 orgs with 5 seats taken each. Idk how many total seats this installation (self-hosted) can have. But it seems that all owners of the 2 orgs are distinct (e.g. with different IDs)
So the total count of seats used is 10, and you create a new owner to prove that we can extend that.
Is that the idea?
(assuming I'm correct - which I might very well not be)
What I'd like to see:
- Call
get_installation_plan_activated_usersexplicitly to see what users are activated (before and after creating the new user) - Have some overlap on the plan_activated_users across the orgs (cause that was the original problem, right?)
joseph-sentry
force-pushed
the
joseph/fix-plan-activated-users
branch
2 times, most recently
from
69aa03b
to
15c90b5
Compare
Signed-off-by: joseph-sentry <[email protected]>
… in multiple orgs Signed-off-by: joseph-sentry <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: joseph-sentry <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: joseph-sentry <[email protected]>
joseph-sentry
force-pushed
the
joseph/fix-plan-activated-users
branch
from
15c90b5
to
6c00d0f
Compare
this PR changes the behaviour of
get_installation_plan_activated_usersto no longer count one user in multiple orgs as multiple users to match the behaviour in the APIFixes: #121