Return the RTMP publishing address from registerRtmpInput

[Gawor270]

Description

The composition API now reports a complete RTMP publish URL where it previously reported only a port.

• Regenerated the composition client: RegisterInputResponse.port is replaced by publishUrl
• registerRtmpInput returns the publish URL instead of void, throwing when the server omits it
• Covered the new return value and the missing-URL case in tests

Motivation and Context

The publish address can no longer be derived from the composition origin and a port, so the server supplies the whole URL.

Documentation impact

• Documentation update required

Types of changes

• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)

[linear]

FCE-3761

[Copilot]

🟡 Changes recommended

The PR description flags a required documentation update for this breaking change, but no documentation changes are included.

Once you've addressed the issues Copilot identified, you can request another Copilot review.

Pull request overview

Updates the Composition client to reflect a server-side change where RTMP inputs now return a full publish URL (instead of a derivable port), and exposes that URL via registerRtmpInput.

Changes:

• Regenerates the Composition OpenAPI client model to replace RegisterInputResponse.port with publishUrl.
• Changes CompositionClient.registerRtmpInput to return the RTMP publish URL and throw if the server omits it.
• Updates/extends Composition client tests to cover the new response shape and the missing-URL error case.

File summaries

File	Description
packages/js-server-sdk/tests/composition.test.ts	Updates serialization expectations and adds tests for registerRtmpInput returning/throwing based on publish_url.
packages/js-server-sdk/src/composition.ts	Makes registerRtmpInput return publishUrl and throw UnknownException when absent.
packages/composition-openapi/src/generated/models/RegisterInputResponse.ts	Regenerated OpenAPI model mapping publish_url ⇄ publishUrl (replacing port).

Review details

• Files reviewed: 2/3 changed files
• Comments generated: 1
• Review effort level: Lite

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.