Add CodiNotificationRequest model and update imports and tests

[rcabrera-py]

• Introduced CodiNotificationRequest class with various fields for payment notifications.
• Updated init.py to include CodiNotificationRequest in the exports.
• Added a test case for CodiNotificationRequest to validate its instantiation and field values.

Summary by CodeRabbit

Release Notes

• New Features

  • Extended validation capabilities to support CoDi payment notifications

• Other

  • Version incremented to 2.1.39.dev0

[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: d701c696-30f9-4843-8bb6-c1f020548451

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 62957a5 and e4d9752.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)

• cuenca_validations/types/__init__.py
• cuenca_validations/types/requests.py
• cuenca_validations/version.py
• tests/test_requests.py

---

Walkthrough

A new CodiNotificationRequest Pydantic model is added to cuenca_validations/types/requests.py, extending BaseRequest. It declares three required fields (clave_rastreo, status, folio_esquema) and multiple optional CoDi transaction fields covering payment type, amount, concept, orderer/beneficiary account identifiers and names, phone alias/digit-verifier pairs, and an optional charge timestamp. The class is registered in cuenca_validations/types/__init__.py via __all__ and a new import statement. A round-trip serialization test is added, and the package version is bumped to 2.1.39.dev0.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~5 minutes

Suggested reviewers

• rogelioLpz

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately summarizes the main changes: adding the CodiNotificationRequest model, updating imports, and adding tests.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
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 docstrings

• Create stacked PR
• Commit on current branch

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch feat/add-request-for-codi

---

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (62957a5) to head (e4d9752).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main      #415   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           16        16           
  Lines         1502      1519   +17     
=========================================
+ Hits          1502      1519   +17     

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/__init__.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
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 Harness.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 62957a5...e4d9752. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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