Made in operator work as In insted of equal logic (#13078)

Changed the In operator to actually work like an In instead of being same logic as Equals. This means that in promotions you can add a rule to apply when a product is in a category or multiple different. Before the logic had to match all the products categories to apply, which doesnt really make sense when you have nested category structure on products. The logic also applies to tags where you can make a rule apply based on a tag before it also had to match all tags on a product to apply.

Issue:

https://github.com/medusajs/medusa/issues/12669

Co-authored-by: Carlos R. L. Rodrigues <37986729+carlos-r-l-rodrigues@users.noreply.github.com>

packages/modules/promotion/integration-tests/__tests__/services/promotion-module/evaluate-rule-value-condition.spec.ts

@@ -18,6 +18,16 @@ moduleIntegrationTestRunner({
         })
       })
 
+      describe("in", () => {
+        const operator = "in"
+
+        it("should evaluate conditions accurately", async () => {
+          expect(testFunc(["1", "2"], operator, [2])).toEqual(true)
+          expect(testFunc(["2"], operator, ["2"])).toEqual(true)
+          expect(testFunc(["2"], operator, ["22"])).toEqual(false)
+        })
+      })
+
       describe("ne", () => {
         const operator = "ne"
 

packages/modules/promotion/src/utils/validations/promotion-rule.ts

@@ -117,11 +117,14 @@ export function evaluateRuleValueCondition(
   }
 
   switch (operator) {
-    case "in":
     case "eq": {
       const ruleValueSet = new Set(ruleValues)
       return valuesToCheck.every((val) => ruleValueSet.has(`${val}`))
     }
+    case "in": {
+      const ruleValueSet = new Set(ruleValues)
+      return valuesToCheck.some((val) => ruleValueSet.has(`${val}`))
+    }
     case "ne": {
       const ruleValueSet = new Set(ruleValues)
       return valuesToCheck.every((val) => !ruleValueSet.has(`${val}`))