mxaccessgw

T

Joseph Doherty 1f546c46ee Resolve Contracts-002 code-review finding

MxCommandReply.payload has no by-name ack case: MX_COMMAND_KIND_ACKNOWLEDGE_
ALARM_BY_NAME reuses the acknowledge_alarm reply payload. Verified the worker
(MxAccessCommandExecutor.ExecuteAcknowledgeAlarmByName) and gateway
(WorkerAlarmRpcDispatcher) already implement this correctly — the gap was
purely undocumented contract asymmetry. Documented the reuse on the proto
oneof case and the AcknowledgeAlarmReplyPayload message comment (regenerating
the .NET contract), and in docs/AlarmClientDiscovery.md. Added
ProtobufContractRoundTripTests.MxCommandReply_AcknowledgeAlarmByName_Reuses
AcknowledgeAlarmPayloadCase to pin the contract.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

2026-05-18 21:50:57 -04:00

clients

Resolve Client.Python-003, -005, -009 code-review findings

2026-05-18 21:45:16 -04:00

code-reviews

Resolve Contracts-002 code-review finding

2026-05-18 21:50:57 -04:00

docs

Resolve Contracts-002 code-review finding

2026-05-18 21:50:57 -04:00

lib

A.2: replace AlarmClientConsumer with wnwrap-based polling consumer