collab: Revert livekit changes - #59733
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This reverts commit 68d2325.
This reverts commit e5b6041.
Reverting #59388/#59195 removed the `live_kit_connection_info` field (number 4) from `RejoinRoomResponse`. Reserve the number and name so a future change cannot reuse field 4 with an incompatible type and silently break wire compatibility with builds that ran the reverted code. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
cla-bot
Bot
added
the
cla-signed
zed-community-bot
Bot
added
the
staff
NeelChotai
approved these changes
Jun 23, 2026
saranblock3
pushed a commit
to saranblock3/zed
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 23, 2026
- **Revert "livekit: Preserve tokens on channel rejoin (zed-industries#59388)"** - **Revert "call: Log LiveKit connection info refresh outcomes in retry loop (zed-industries#59205)"** - **Revert "audio: Fix phantom presence in channels (zed-industries#59195)"** - **proto: Reserve RejoinRoomResponse field 4 after revert** We've observed a spike of phantom collaborator issues after this fixes. This sucks and I'm quite unhappy about it. # Objective - Describe the objective or issue this PR addresses. - If you're fixing a specific issue, use "Fixes #X" for each issue as [described in the GitHub docs](https://docs.github.com/en/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/using-issues/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue#linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue-using-a-keyword). ## Solution - Describe the solution used to achieve the objective above. ## Testing - Did you test these changes? If so, how? - Are there any parts that need more testing? - How can other people (reviewers) test your changes? Is there anything specific they need to know? - If relevant, what platforms did you test these changes on, and are there any important ones you can't test? ## Self-Review Checklist: - [ ] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability - [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments - [ ] The content adheres to Zed's UI standards ([UX/UI](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist) and [icon](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/crates/icons/README.md) guidelines) - [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior - [ ] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable ## Showcase > This section is optional. If this PR does not include a visual change or does not add a new user-facing feature, you can delete this section. - Help others understand the result of this PR by showcasing your awesome work! - If this PR includes a visual change, consider adding a screenshot, GIF, or video - A before/after comparison is very useful for changes to existing features! While a showcase should aim to be brief and digestible, you can use a toggleable section to save space on longer showcases: <details> <summary>Click to view showcase</summary> My super cool demos here </details> --- Release Notes: - N/A --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
weihuoya
pushed a commit
to weihuoya/zed
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 25, 2026
- **Revert "livekit: Preserve tokens on channel rejoin (zed-industries#59388)"** - **Revert "call: Log LiveKit connection info refresh outcomes in retry loop (zed-industries#59205)"** - **Revert "audio: Fix phantom presence in channels (zed-industries#59195)"** - **proto: Reserve RejoinRoomResponse field 4 after revert** We've observed a spike of phantom collaborator issues after this fixes. This sucks and I'm quite unhappy about it. # Objective - Describe the objective or issue this PR addresses. - If you're fixing a specific issue, use "Fixes #X" for each issue as [described in the GitHub docs](https://docs.github.com/en/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/using-issues/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue#linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue-using-a-keyword). ## Solution - Describe the solution used to achieve the objective above. ## Testing - Did you test these changes? If so, how? - Are there any parts that need more testing? - How can other people (reviewers) test your changes? Is there anything specific they need to know? - If relevant, what platforms did you test these changes on, and are there any important ones you can't test? ## Self-Review Checklist: - [ ] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability - [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments - [ ] The content adheres to Zed's UI standards ([UX/UI](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist) and [icon](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/crates/icons/README.md) guidelines) - [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior - [ ] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable ## Showcase > This section is optional. If this PR does not include a visual change or does not add a new user-facing feature, you can delete this section. - Help others understand the result of this PR by showcasing your awesome work! - If this PR includes a visual change, consider adding a screenshot, GIF, or video - A before/after comparison is very useful for changes to existing features! While a showcase should aim to be brief and digestible, you can use a toggleable section to save space on longer showcases: <details> <summary>Click to view showcase</summary> My super cool demos here </details> --- Release Notes: - N/A --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
jolutz
pushed a commit
to jolutz/zed
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2026
- **Revert "livekit: Preserve tokens on channel rejoin (zed-industries#59388)"** - **Revert "call: Log LiveKit connection info refresh outcomes in retry loop (zed-industries#59205)"** - **Revert "audio: Fix phantom presence in channels (zed-industries#59195)"** - **proto: Reserve RejoinRoomResponse field 4 after revert** We've observed a spike of phantom collaborator issues after this fixes. This sucks and I'm quite unhappy about it. # Objective - Describe the objective or issue this PR addresses. - If you're fixing a specific issue, use "Fixes #X" for each issue as [described in the GitHub docs](https://docs.github.com/en/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/using-issues/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue#linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue-using-a-keyword). ## Solution - Describe the solution used to achieve the objective above. ## Testing - Did you test these changes? If so, how? - Are there any parts that need more testing? - How can other people (reviewers) test your changes? Is there anything specific they need to know? - If relevant, what platforms did you test these changes on, and are there any important ones you can't test? ## Self-Review Checklist: - [ ] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability - [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments - [ ] The content adheres to Zed's UI standards ([UX/UI](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist) and [icon](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/crates/icons/README.md) guidelines) - [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior - [ ] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable ## Showcase > This section is optional. If this PR does not include a visual change or does not add a new user-facing feature, you can delete this section. - Help others understand the result of this PR by showcasing your awesome work! - If this PR includes a visual change, consider adding a screenshot, GIF, or video - A before/after comparison is very useful for changes to existing features! While a showcase should aim to be brief and digestible, you can use a toggleable section to save space on longer showcases: <details> <summary>Click to view showcase</summary> My super cool demos here </details> --- Release Notes: - N/A --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We've observed a spike of phantom collaborator issues after this fixes. This sucks and I'm quite unhappy about it.
Objective
Solution
Testing
Self-Review Checklist:
Showcase
While a showcase should aim to be brief and digestible, you can use a toggleable section to save space on longer showcases:
Click to view showcase
My super cool demos here
Release Notes: