Pavel Kirilin

So, it happens because the way tasknames generated. You can fix this issue by explicitly defining taskname in the decorator. ```python @broker.task(task_name="add_one") async def add_one(value: int) -> int: print(value, '#'...

You can construct an `AsyncKicker` and `kiq` it as you'd do with task. Here's how taskiq-pipelines does it: https://github.com/taskiq-python/taskiq-pipelines/blob/ef097a5baa3caf66b065fdddf5fbcbcac0b75532/taskiq_pipelines/pipeliner.py#L383.

No it's actually not that deep in the package. So, in simple case it'd look like this: ```python kicked = await AsyncKicker(broker=broker, task_name="task_name", labels={}).kiq(*args, **kwargs) ```

But I'd generally advise to use tasks for better experience. If you don't have actual code, you can define placeholders with types as this: ```python @broker.task(task_name="external_task") async def my_task(arg1: str,...

That's true. I'll add an article about this in docs. Please keep this issue open. I'll close it once it's in docs.

I'm glad I could help you. If you find this project useful, please consider supporting it. Also, currently I'm gathering list of companies that use taskiq. I would really appreciate...

That is actually quite a good idea. I will try implementing it during this week.

Can you please share a stacktrace?

I guess it has something to do with pydantic in that case. Since we use `model_validate` to convert model back. I might play around to find a solution to your...

I guess it might be caused by [this line](https://github.com/taskiq-python/taskiq/blob/fec963390d640c350bdf9ca421dd3d75d1a3dbfc/taskiq/brokers/zmq_broker.py#L80). Try removing the `with` statement and only leaving this. ```python await self.socket.send_multipart(parts) ``` If it works, you can make a PR,...