-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 77
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
ST110 - StrictAssetsModelingRuleSchema #4519
Conversation
Changelog(s) in markdown:
|
I checked the new feature on ModelingRule Directory. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
awesome, please add a unit test since this isn't a standard ST110 case
|
||
|
||
class StrictAssetsModelingRuleSchema(BaseStrictModel): | ||
__root__: Optional[Dict[constr(regex=r".+"), Dict[str, AssetType]]] = None # type:ignore[valid-type] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
r".+"
means a string that isn't empty?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yes, since the field can be everything
as it allows in the schema file
Co-authored-by: dorschw <81086590+dorschw@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: dorschw <81086590+dorschw@users.noreply.github.com>
Related Issues
relates: https://jira-dc.paloaltonetworks.com/browse/CIAC-7809
Description
Add StrictAssetsModelingRuleSchema pydantic object for ST110 validation