feat(version): add MANUAL_VERSION, --next and --patch to version command #1724

bearomorphism · 2025-12-12T11:29:27Z

Manually tested and added test cases, the result LGTM.

bearomorphism · 2025-12-12T11:33:59Z

@Lee-W I already ran pytest tests/commands/test_version_command.py -n auto --regen-all to regenerate the test files, but the pipeline still fails. (The tests passed on my machine)

Do you have any ideas why this happen

woile · 2025-12-12T11:36:39Z

commitizen/commands/version.py

-                version = f"{version_scheme.minor}"
+                out.write(version.major)
+                return
+            if self.arguments.get("minor"):


I realize now that this creates problems with the (not)monotonic kind of versions (and possible non-semver). I'm not sure what to do about it.

I think for now it's fine that if you diverge too much from semver in your custom version scheme, then you won't get the full range of features.

woile · 2025-12-12T11:59:08Z

There was a way to run all the pre-commits, but I don't remember how it works 😅

woile · 2025-12-12T12:05:16Z

tests/commands/test_version_command.py

+
+
+@pytest.mark.parametrize(
+    "next_version, current_version, expected_version",


maybe rename next_version to next_increment?
In the user facing cli, it makes sense semantically: --next=MAJOR (give me the next major).

woile · 2025-12-12T12:08:25Z

tests/commands/test_version_command.py

+    assert expected_version in captured.out
+
+
+def test_next_version_invalid_version(config, capsys):


what about having a parametrize of the combinations that should fail:

@pytest.mark.parametrize( "args", [ # incomplete list: {"next"}, # ... {"--verbose", "next"} ] )

Sounds good.

woile · 2025-12-12T12:19:38Z

commitizen/commands/version.py

+                out.error("Invalid version.")
+                return
+
+            if next_str := self.arguments.get("next"):


what would happen here if I run cz version --project --next? I would expect that to work

That also works.

The behavior is the same as cz version --next=*

But what would be the output?

Oh I misunderstood your question. The output should depend on the commit history, right?
I forgot to implement that.

I will do #1678 in another PR since it's a bit complicated (we need to consider major_version_zero, bump_map, etc. for this feature and I prefer not to just copy & paste code, need some refactoring)

Indeed, that logic should be core and it should be possible to re-use it across commands.

woile · 2025-12-12T12:24:07Z

Nice to see this going forward 🎉

codecov · 2025-12-13T02:42:13Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 97.10145% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 97.81%. Comparing base (1d89195) to head (c3d27c9).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
commitizen/commands/version.py	94.73%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1724      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   97.88%   97.81%   -0.08%     
==========================================
  Files          60       61       +1     
  Lines        2606     2649      +43     
==========================================
+ Hits         2551     2591      +40     
- Misses         55       58       +3

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

bearomorphism · 2025-12-13T03:12:26Z

@Lee-W I already ran pytest tests/commands/test_version_command.py -n auto --regen-all to regenerate the test files, but the pipeline still fails. (The tests passed on my machine)

Do you have any ideas why this happen

I see why the test failure happens. Please see my other PR #1726 .

bearomorphism · 2025-12-13T03:43:29Z

I will rebase this branch after #1726 is merged. The test failure should be resolved then.

noirbizarre

That's an interesting feature, one that I would totally use!

Also, I never realized that the version command was doing totally different things depending on the flags 😅
So maybe it's the occasion to have a dedicated --version flag and have the version command focusing on the the project versioning and not the Commitizen version. It would be cleaner, easier to understand and more standard. WDYT ?

Note

I would not remove the Type aliases as it makes the PR bigger than it should and it introduce a breaking change (and reading the PR and issues, we know that it has been used by some users for some custom version schemes).

commitizen/version_schemes.py

noirbizarre · 2026-01-05T01:45:38Z

commitizen/version_increment.py

+        return self.name
+
+    @classmethod
+    def safe_cast(cls, value: object) -> "VersionIncrement":


Add from __future__ import annotations and remove the quotes to stay consistent with the existing code base.

Also it's not a cast but an instantiation, so maybe rename this in from_value()

iirc there is a ruff rule for this. will check later when I have a moment

https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/quoted-annotation/

commitizen/version_increment.py

noirbizarre · 2026-01-05T02:18:44Z

Also, the enumn part seems to overlap with #1518, so maybe #1518 should go first so this PR can reuse the Increment enum

bearomorphism · 2026-01-05T02:36:03Z

Also, the enumn part seems to overlap with #1518, so maybe #1518 should go first so this PR can reuse the Increment enum

I would prefer to merge this before #1518 because it is a bit larger than this PR.

So maybe it's the occasion to have a dedicated --version flag and have the version command focusing on the the project versioning and not the Commitizen version. It would be cleaner, easier to understand and more standard. WDYT ?

+1. As a user, I often run cz --version and end up seeing an error. We can create another work item about adding the dedicated flag and then deprecate cz version --commitizen and other removable flags in the next major version.

woile · 2026-01-05T08:44:11Z

We had a --version in the past, but it was replaced by version, do you remember why @Lee-W ?
It would be a breaking change if we go that route. If agreed, I can add it as a different task on the parent issue tracking this work #1677

bearomorphism requested review from Lee-W, noirbizarre and woile as code owners December 12, 2025 11:29

github-actions bot added pr-status: wait-for-review type: feature A new enhacement proposal labels Dec 12, 2025

woile reviewed Dec 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

bearomorphism force-pushed the feat-next-version branch from 54159ff to 34fb773 Compare December 13, 2025 02:39

bearomorphism force-pushed the feat-next-version branch 3 times, most recently from 8d938d2 to f9afbd4 Compare December 14, 2025 14:08

bearomorphism force-pushed the feat-next-version branch from f9afbd4 to 094f48b Compare December 28, 2025 05:27

bearomorphism changed the base branch from v4-11-0 to master December 29, 2025 11:11

bearomorphism force-pushed the feat-next-version branch 3 times, most recently from 3b48a33 to b07121e Compare January 3, 2026 17:24

noirbizarre requested changes Jan 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

bearomorphism marked this pull request as draft January 5, 2026 14:13

bearomorphism removed the pr-status: wait-for-review label Jan 6, 2026

bearomorphism force-pushed the feat-next-version branch from b07121e to 044416d Compare January 6, 2026 13:06

github-actions bot added the pr-status: wait-for-review label Jan 6, 2026

bearomorphism force-pushed the feat-next-version branch 4 times, most recently from 575468d to 3af1a57 Compare January 6, 2026 13:24

bearomorphism marked this pull request as ready for review January 6, 2026 13:26

bearomorphism force-pushed the feat-next-version branch from 3af1a57 to 4b6a441 Compare January 6, 2026 13:56

feat(version): add MANUAL_VERSION, --next and --patch to version command

c3d27c9

bearomorphism force-pushed the feat-next-version branch from 4b6a441 to c3d27c9 Compare January 6, 2026 14:01

bearomorphism changed the title ~~feat(version): add MANUAL_VERSION, --next and --patch to version comm…~~ feat(version): add MANUAL_VERSION, --next and --patch to version command Jan 6, 2026

bearomorphism mentioned this pull request Jan 6, 2026

VersionIncrement related cleanup #1777

Open

2 tasks

bearomorphism requested a review from noirbizarre January 7, 2026 10:31



		@pytest.mark.parametrize(
		"next_version, current_version, expected_version",

		assert expected_version in captured.out


		def test_next_version_invalid_version(config, capsys):

Uh oh!

feat(version): add MANUAL_VERSION, --next and --patch to version command #1724

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat(version): add MANUAL_VERSION, --next and --patch to version command #1724

Uh oh!

Conversation

bearomorphism commented Dec 12, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bearomorphism commented Dec 12, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

woile commented Dec 12, 2025

Uh oh!

woile Dec 12, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

woile Dec 12, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

woile commented Dec 12, 2025

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Dec 13, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

bearomorphism commented Dec 13, 2025

Uh oh!

bearomorphism commented Dec 13, 2025

Uh oh!

noirbizarre left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

noirbizarre commented Jan 5, 2026

Uh oh!

bearomorphism commented Jan 5, 2026

Uh oh!

woile commented Jan 5, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

bearomorphism commented Dec 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading

woile Dec 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading

woile Dec 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Dec 13, 2025 •

edited

Loading

woile commented Jan 5, 2026 •

edited

Loading