User status flags

[rogelioLpz]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features
  • Extended user update capabilities to include toggles for inactive status, fraud flagging, PLD blocking, and security mode.
• Chores
  • Bumped package version for this release.

[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: cf311ce9-e2c8-4cbd-9675-7b58305b2e05

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5f9151a and c5f648f.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• cuenca_validations/types/requests.py
• cuenca_validations/version.py

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

• cuenca_validations/types/requests.py

---

Walkthrough

Adds four optional boolean fields (is_inactive, is_fraud, is_pld_blocked, is_security_mode) to the UserUpdateRequest class in cuenca_validations/types/requests.py. Also bumps __version__ in cuenca_validations/version.py from 2.1.25 to 2.1.26. No validation, control flow, or other logic changes were introduced.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• PR #395: Adds blacklist_validation_status to UserUpdateRequest, another additive field change to the same model.
• PR #381: Adds a fiscal-related optional field to UserUpdateRequest, similar model extension.
• PR #383: Adds additional optional fields to UserUpdateRequest, expanding the update payload.

Suggested reviewers

• felipao-mx

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title 'User status flags' accurately summarizes the main change: adding four optional boolean status flag fields (is_inactive, is_fraud, is_pld_blocked, is_security_mode) to the UserUpdateRequest class.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

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

✨ Finishing Touches

• 📝 Generate docstrings (stacked PR)
• 📝 Generate docstrings (commit on current branch)

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch user-flags

---

_{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 (034fd70) to head (c5f648f).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main      #396   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           16        16           
  Lines         1418      1422    +4     
=========================================
+ Hits          1418      1422    +4     

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_validations/types/requests.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
cuenca_validations/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 034fd70...c5f648f. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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