rquired-action

[rogelioLpz]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • User profiles now include an optional "required action" indicator to surface when additional user steps are needed.

• Chores

  • Client version bumped to 2.1.19.
  • Validation dependency pinned to 2.1.30.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 25d40dc9-47c2-4214-ad5c-8cff7eaa3357

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f46a74a and 58f9f7e.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• requirements.txt

✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)

• requirements.txt

---

Walkthrough

Adds an optional required_action: Optional[RequiredAction] = None field to the User resource model (cuenca/resources/users.py). Updates package version in cuenca/version.py from 2.1.18 to 2.1.19. Bumps the cuenca-validations requirement in requirements.txt from 2.1.27 to 2.1.30.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• Add blacklist_validation_status and pronouns fields to User class #434: Modifies the User resource model by adding new optional fields — overlapping model changes.
• User status flags #436: Adds additional fields/flags to the User model — related model-level edits.
• Update version #438: Bumps __version__ in cuenca/version.py — related version update.

Suggested reviewers

• gmorales96
• alexviquez

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3 | ❌ 2

❌ Failed checks (2 warnings)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Title check	⚠️ Warning	The title contains a typo ('rquired-action' instead of 'required-action') and does not clearly communicate the main changes in the pull request.	Correct the typo to 'required-action' or use a more descriptive title like 'Add required_action field to User resource' to better summarize the main change.
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch required-action

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (55af0ca) to head (58f9f7e).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main      #439   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           54        54           
  Lines         1198      1199    +1     
=========================================
+ Hits          1198      1199    +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
cuenca/resources/users.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
cuenca/version.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 55af0ca...58f9f7e. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.