fix: Rename push_notification to push_notification_config #482
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @kabir, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request implements a refactoring change to enhance the clarity and consistency of the codebase. Specifically, it renames a field related to push notifications within the 'SendMessageConfiguration' protobuf message and updates all dependent Java code. This ensures that the field name accurately reflects its purpose as a configuration object, aligning with established naming conventions. Highlights
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request correctly renames the push_notification field to push_notification_config within the SendMessageConfiguration message. The change is consistently applied across the protobuf definition, the generated Java code, and the handwritten utility code. This refactoring improves clarity by making the field name more descriptive and consistent with its type. The changes are sound and I have no further recommendations.
This was missing in the non-streaming message sends Follows up on #383 and #482 The TCK is not testing this, but it is introduced in a2aproject/a2a-tck#94
…ct#483) This was missing in the non-streaming message sends Follows up on a2aproject#383 and a2aproject#482 The TCK is not testing this, but it is introduced in a2aproject/a2a-tck#94
Fixes: #383
Needs a2aproject/a2a-tck#94