Update version.py

[rcabrera-py]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Incremented package version to 2.1.18.dev0 to begin the next development cycle.
  • No user-facing features, fixes, or behavior changes included in this release.
  • Upgrade is safe; no configuration changes or migrations required.
  • Maintains full backward compatibility; operational impact and risk are minimal.
  • Uses a pre-release identifier to track ongoing work between formal releases.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The version string in cuenca_validations/version.py was updated from '2.1.17' to '2.1.18.dev0'. No other files or logic were changed.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Title Check	❓ Inconclusive	The title “Update version.py” refers to the file being modified but does not clearly convey the main change of bumping the package version, making it too generic to communicate the intent of the PR. It fails to summarize the key change in a concise, informative way for teammates scanning the history.	Consider using a more descriptive title such as “Bump version to 2.1.18.dev0” to clearly highlight the primary change in this PR.

✅ Passed checks (2 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changes. Docstring coverage check skipped.

✨ Finishing touches

• 📝 Generate docstrings

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch rcabrera-py-patch-1

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between e148e74 and 541bb09.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• cuenca_validations/version.py (1 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

📓 Path-based instructions (1)

**/*.py

⚙️ CodeRabbit configuration file

**/*.py: Enforce Relative Imports for Internal Modules

Ensure that any imports referencing internal modules use relative paths. However, if modules reside in the main module directories (for example /src or /library_or_app_name) —and relative imports are not feasible—absolute imports are acceptable. Additionally, if a module is located outside the main module structure (for example, in /tests or /scripts at a similar level), absolute imports are also valid.

Examples and Guidelines:

1. If a module is in the same folder or a subfolder of the current file, use relative imports. For instance: from .some_module import SomeClass
2. If the module is located under /src or /library_or_app_name and cannot be imported relatively, absolute imports are allowed (e.g., from library_or_app_name.utilities import helper_method).
3. If a module is outside the main module directories (for example, in /tests, /scripts, or any similarly placed directory), absolute imports are valid.
4. External (third-party) libraries should be imported absolutely (e.g., import requests).

**/*.py:
Rule: Enforce Snake Case in Python Backend

1. New or Modified Code: Use snake_case for all variables, functions, methods, and class attributes.
2. Exceptions (Pydantic models for API responses):
   • Primary fields must be snake_case.
   • If older clients expect camelCase, create a computed or alias field that references the snake_case field.
   • Mark any camelCase fields as deprecated or transitional.

Examples

Invalid:

class CardConfiguration(BaseModel):
    title: str
    subTitle: str  # ❌ Modified or new field in camelCase

Valid:

class CardConfiguration(BaseModel):
    title: str
    subtitle: str  # ✅ snake_case for new/modified field

    @computed_field
    def subTitle(self) -> str:  # camelCase allowed only for compatibility
        return self.subtitle

Any direct use of camelCase in new or updated code outside of these exceptions should be flagged.

`*...

Files:

• cuenca_validations/version.py

🔇 Additional comments (1)

cuenca_validations/version.py (1)

1-1: Version bump looks correct.

Nothing else to flag here.

---

_{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 (e148e74) to head (541bb09).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main      #388   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           16        16           
  Lines         1394      1394           
=========================================
  Hits          1394      1394           

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/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 e148e74...541bb09. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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