Skip to content

Conversation

@marcschier
Copy link
Collaborator

@marcschier marcschier commented Jan 13, 2026

Proposed changes

Fix regression introduced when adding nullable annotation to reconnect handler

Related Issues

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce?
Put an x in the boxes that apply. You can also fill these out after creating the PR.

  • Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • Enhancement (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Test enhancement (non-breaking change to increase test coverage)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected, requires version increase of Nuget packages)
  • Documentation Update (if none of the other choices apply)

Checklist

Put an x in the boxes that apply. You can also fill these out after creating the PR. If you're unsure about any of them, don't hesitate to ask. We're here to help! This is simply a reminder of what we are going to look for before merging your code.

  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING doc.
  • I have signed the CLA.
  • I ran tests locally with my changes, all passed.
  • I fixed all failing tests in the CI pipelines.
  • I fixed all introduced issues with CodeQL and LGTM.
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works and increased code coverage.
  • I have added necessary documentation (if appropriate).
  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules.

Further comments

If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc...

Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

This PR fixes a regression that was introduced when nullable annotations were added to the session reconnect handler. The regression incorrectly handled the transportChannel parameter which can legitimately be null during session reconnection scenarios.

Changes:

  • Moved the null check for transportChannel from an early position to after the reverse connect logic where it's appropriately handled
  • Added proper null safety handling for endpointDescription with a null check before usage
  • Added nullable propagation for Server.ApplicationUri property access
  • Split the RecreateAsync call logic to properly handle both null and non-null transportChannel cases by calling the appropriate overload

@marcschier marcschier merged commit 773af55 into master Jan 14, 2026
112 checks passed
@marcschier marcschier deleted the statuscodeice branch January 14, 2026 06:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Could not reconnect because transport channel is null for reverse connect

3 participants