fix(generators): serialize timeout and max_retries in OpenAIImageGenerator.to_dict

[Anai-Guo]

Related Issues

• No open issue; found while auditing to_dict() coverage across components.

Proposed Changes:

OpenAIImageGenerator.__init__ takes timeout and max_retries, stores both on the instance, and _client_kwargs() passes them to OpenAI/AsyncOpenAI. to_dict() never emitted them, so they were lost on the way through a serialized pipeline:

g = OpenAIImageGenerator(timeout=60.0, max_retries=10)
g2 = OpenAIImageGenerator.from_dict(g.to_dict())

g._client_kwargs()   # {'timeout': 60.0, 'max_retries': 10}
g2._client_kwargs()  # {'timeout': 30.0, 'max_retries': 5}   <- silently back to the defaults

The fallback is silent: _client_kwargs() reads OPENAI_TIMEOUT/OPENAI_MAX_RETRIES or defaults to 30s / 5 retries whenever the attribute is None, so a deserialized pipeline just runs with different client settings than the one that was saved.

This is the only OpenAI-backed component with the gap — OpenAIChatGenerator, OpenAIGenerator, AzureOpenAIChatGenerator, AzureOpenAIResponsesChatGenerator, OpenAIResponsesChatGenerator, OpenAI{Text,Document}Embedder, AzureOpenAI{Text,Document}Embedder and OpenAITokenCounter all serialize both fields already.

response_format is deliberately left out: it is documented as ignored and only kept for backward compatibility, and __init__ warns when it is set to anything other than "b64_json".

How did you test it?

hatch run test:unit -k openai_image_generator equivalent (pytest test/components/generators/test_openai_image_generator.py):

• before the fix: 3 failed, 20 passed, 2 skipped — the two updated to_dict expectations plus the new round-trip test
• after the fix: 23 passed, 2 skipped

Updated test_to_dict, test_to_dict_with_params and test_from_dict to cover the two fields (test_to_dict_with_params already passed timeout=60, max_retries=10 into the constructor but asserted they were dropped), and added test_to_dict_from_dict_roundtrip_keeps_client_kwargs, which asserts _client_kwargs() is identical across a to_dict()/from_dict() round trip.

ruff check and ruff format --check are clean on both touched files.

Notes for the reviewer

The branch is cut from an older main because my fork cannot be fast-forwarded (my token has no workflow scope and syncing touches .github/workflows/). The three hunks are pure additions and merge cleanly onto current main; happy to rebase if you prefer.

Checklist

• I have read the contributors guidelines and the code of conduct.
• I have updated the related issue with new insights and changes.
• I have added unit tests and updated the docstrings.
• I've used one of the conventional commit types for my PR title.
• I have documented my code.
• I have added a release note file, following the contributors guidelines.
• I have run pre-commit hooks and fixed any issue.

---

This PR was written with an AI assistant (Claude Code). I have reviewed the changes and run the relevant tests locally.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[vercel]

@Anai-Guo is attempting to deploy a commit to the deepset Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[CLAassistant]

Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
_{You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.}

[julian-risch]

The changes look good to me @Anai-Guo ! Thank you for opening this PR. As soon as you agree to the CLA we can merge this PR.

[HaystackBot]

Hi @Anai-Guo, thanks a lot for your contribution! 🙏

We noticed that the Contributor License Agreement (CLA) check (license/cla) hasn't passed yet, so we've temporarily moved this PR to draft and paused the review assignment.

To get your PR reviewed, please sign the CLA via the link in the license/cla check below (or in the CLA bot comment). As soon as the check turns green, this PR will automatically be marked ready for review again and a reviewer will be re-assigned.

[Anai-Guo]

Noting for the record that this is blocked only on the license/cla check — the change itself is approved. The CLA has to be signed by a person, so I've flagged it for my account owner rather than clicking through it myself; I'll follow up once it's signed.

[HaystackBot]

Hi @Anai-Guo, just a friendly reminder: this PR is still in draft because the Contributor License Agreement (CLA) hasn't been signed yet. We'd love to review your contribution! Please sign the CLA via the link in the license/cla check, and this PR will automatically be marked ready for review.

[Anai-Guo]

Friendly ping @julian-risch — this is approved but currently shows as BLOCKED by branch protection. Is there anything else needed from my side before it can be merged?

[julian-risch]

Hi @Anai-Guo, just a friendly reminder: this PR is still pending because the Contributor License Agreement (CLA) hasn't been signed yet. We'd love to merge your contribution! Please sign the CLA via the link in the license/cla check.

[HaystackBot]

Hi @Anai-Guo, this PR is still waiting for the Contributor License Agreement (CLA) to be signed. Please note that if the CLA isn't signed within the next 4 days, this PR will be automatically closed as stale. Signing only takes a minute via the link in the license/cla check, and the PR will then automatically be marked ready for review.