Skip to content

fix: bring back reaction apis to channel - #1906

Merged
isekovanic merged 1 commit into
release-v10from
fix/bring-back-reaction-apis-in-channel
Oct 9, 2026
Merged

isekovanic merged 1 commit into
release-v10from
fix/bring-back-reaction-apis-in-channel

Conversation

@isekovanic

@isekovanic isekovanic commented Oct 9, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

CLA

  • I have signed the Stream CLA (required).
  • Code changes are tested

Description of the changes, What, Why and How?

#1897 removed channel.sendReaction / channel.deleteReaction. This brings them back as thin pass-throughs to client.sendReaction / client.deleteReaction. They take the same arguments, (pathParams, request, requestOptions), and return the same response.

They send the HTTP request only: no local state and no offline queueing, the same as the client methods. The full operation (optimistic state, offline queue, rollback) is still messageOperations.addReaction / deleteReaction.

Unlike the versions removed in #1897, these don't queue for offline replay and don't require the channel to have an id, since a reaction is addressed by message id.

The migration guide no longer lists them as removed.

Changelog

  • channel.sendReaction and channel.deleteReaction are back, as pass-throughs to client.sendReaction / client.deleteReaction

@isekovanic
isekovanic merged commit d419fe3 into release-v10 Oct 9, 2026
6 checks passed
@isekovanic
isekovanic deleted the fix/bring-back-reaction-apis-in-channel branch October 9, 2026 14:14
github-actions Bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2026
## [10.0.0-rc.21](v10.0.0-rc.20...v10.0.0-rc.21) (2026-10-09)

### Bug Fixes

* bring back reaction apis to channel ([#1906](#1906)) ([d419fe3](d419fe3)), closes [#1897](#1897) [#1897](#1897)
@stream-ci-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🎉 This PR is included in version 10.0.0-rc.21 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants