Add atomic batch publish headers and PubAck fields#938
Conversation
|
Claude finished @caspervonb's task in 1m 57s —— View job PR Review
SummaryThe implementation is correct and the backport is sound. A few observations:
No blocking issues. The single inline comment is a suggestion, not a requirement. |
|
@claude please review again |
|
Claude finished @caspervonb's task in 1m 36s —— View job PR Review
SummaryThe implementation is correct and the backport is sound. No blocking issues.
|
| Test | What it checks | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
test_pub_ack_from_response_with_batch_fields |
Wire names mapped to Python names | ✓ |
test_pub_ack_from_response_without_batch_fields |
Fields default to None when absent |
✓ |
test_pub_ack_as_dict_maps_batch_fields |
Reverse mapping and exclusion of Python names | ✓ |
These are correct unittest.TestCase tests that don't require a live server, appropriate for pure data-transformation logic.
Not covered (acceptable for this scope):
- Partially-present batch fields (e.g.,
batchwithoutcount) — would be an invalid server response per ADR-50 anyway - Integration test against a real
allow_atomic=Truestream — useful for end-to-end confidence but out of scope for a data-mapping backport
Verdict: LGTM. No changes required.
Backport of ADR-50 atomic batch publish completion fields (PR #922 in nats-jetstream) so legacy users of
allow_atomic/allow_batchedstreams can read the commit ack.