fix: improve Socket Mode client stability and correctness

[WilliamBergamin]

Summary

These changes aim to improve the stability and correctness of socket-mode client, the issues were mainly found using AI tools and confirmed by human to be legitimate.

This does not introduce any behavior change to the project

Testing

CI testing should be sufficient

Category

• slack_sdk.web.WebClient (sync/async) (Web API client)
• slack_sdk.webhook.WebhookClient (sync/async) (Incoming Webhook, response_url sender)
• slack_sdk.socket_mode (Socket Mode client)
• slack_sdk.signature (Request Signature Verifier)
• slack_sdk.oauth (OAuth Flow Utilities)
• slack_sdk.models (UI component builders)
• slack_sdk.scim (SCIM API client)
• slack_sdk.audit_logs (Audit Logs API client)
• slack_sdk.rtm_v2 (RTM client)
• /docs (Documents)
• /tutorial (PythOnBoardingBot tutorial)
• tests/integration_tests (Automated tests for this library)

Requirements

• I've read and understood the Contributing Guidelines and have done my best effort to follow them.
• I've read and agree to the Code of Conduct.
• I've run python3 -m venv .venv && source .venv/bin/activate && ./scripts/run_validation.sh after making the changes.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 88.88889% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 84.01%. Comparing base (067560a) to head (2787042).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
slack_sdk/socket_mode/builtin/internals.py	50.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1854      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   83.99%   84.01%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         117      117              
  Lines       13253    13256       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits        11132    11137       +5     
+ Misses       2121     2119       -2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[srtaalej]

LGTM ⭐ but looks like you have some unit tests failing - i left a comment with a potench solution?

[srtaalej]

looks like this is where unit tests are failing. this is the fix according to claude

Suggested change

	client.connect_operation_lock = create_autospec(Lock(), acquire=MagicMock(return_value=False))
	mock_lock = create_autospec(Lock())
	mock_lock.acquire.return_value = False
	client.connect_operation_lock = mock_lock

[WilliamBergamin]

Thats spot on 💯 thanks for sharing the solution 🥇