Ensure websocket transport is closed when client does not close it

[bdraco]

Are there changes in behavior for the user?

Ensures the websocket transport is closed if the client never closes the connection after sending the CLOSE message

Is it a substantial burden for the maintainers to support this?

no

Related issue number

fixes #8184

Checklist

• I think the code is well written
• Unit tests for the changes exist
• Documentation reflects the changes
• If you provide code modification, please add yourself to CONTRIBUTORS.txt
  • The format is <Name> <Surname>.
  • Please keep alphabetical order, the file is sorted by names.
• Add a new news fragment into the CHANGES/ folder

  • name it <issue_or_pr_num>.<type>.rst (e.g. 588.bugfix.rst)

  • if you don't have an issue number, change it to the pull request
    number after creating the PR

    • .bugfix: A bug fix for something the maintainers deemed an
      improper undesired behavior that got corrected to match
      pre-agreed expectations.
    • .feature: A new behavior, public APIs. That sort of stuff.
    • .deprecation: A declaration of future API removals and breaking
      changes in behavior.
    • .breaking: When something public is removed in a breaking way.
      Could be deprecated in an earlier release.
    • .doc: Notable updates to the documentation structure or build
      process.
    • .packaging: Notes for downstreams about unobvious side effects
      and tooling. Changes in the test invocation considerations and
      runtime assumptions.
    • .contrib: Stuff that affects the contributor experience. e.g.
      Running tests, building the docs, setting up the development
      environment.
    • .misc: Changes that are hard to assign to any of the above
      categories.

  • Make sure to use full sentences with correct case and punctuation,
    for example:

    Fixed issue with non-ascii contents in doctest text files
    -- by :user:`contributor-gh-handle`.

    Use the past tense or the present tense a non-imperative mood,
    referring to what's changed compared to the last released version
    of this project.

[Dreamsorcerer]

Looks about right to me.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 97.56%. Comparing base (8f23712) to head (f9d8120).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #8200      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   97.53%   97.56%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         107      107              
  Lines       32845    32936      +91     
  Branches     3851     3851              
==========================================
+ Hits        32034    32133      +99     
+ Misses        610      602       -8     
  Partials      201      201              

Flag	Coverage Δ
CI-GHA	97.47% <100.00%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
OS-Linux	97.13% <98.97%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
OS-Windows	95.81% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
OS-macOS	96.95% <98.97%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
Py-3.10.11	95.55% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
Py-3.10.13	96.69% <98.97%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
Py-3.10.14	96.91% <98.97%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
Py-3.11.8	96.92% <100.00%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
Py-3.12.2	97.05% <100.00%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
Py-3.8.10	95.53% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
Py-3.8.18	96.88% <98.97%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
Py-3.9.13	95.52% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
Py-3.9.18	96.66% <98.97%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
Py-3.9.19	96.88% <98.97%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
Py-pypy7.3.15	96.45% <98.97%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
VM-macos	96.95% <98.97%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
VM-ubuntu	97.13% <98.97%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
VM-windows	95.81% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

[bdraco]

This one still makes sense after working on #8251 I'll merge it first and than rebase the other one so I get a good test of everything together

[patchback]

Backport to 3.9: 💔 cherry-picking failed — conflicts found

❌ Failed to cleanly apply 6ec4747 on top of patchback/backports/3.9/6ec4747a02955dbf227fb66f4419d124a37fcc71/pr-8200

Backporting merged PR #8200 into master

1. Ensure you have a local repo clone of your fork. Unless you cloned it
   from the upstream, this would be your origin remote.
2. Make sure you have an upstream repo added as a remote too. In these
   instructions you'll refer to it by the name upstream. If you don't
   have it, here's how you can add it:

   $ git remote add upstream https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp.git

3. Ensure you have the latest copy of upstream and prepare a branch
   that will hold the backported code:

   $ git fetch upstream
   $ git checkout -b patchback/backports/3.9/6ec4747a02955dbf227fb66f4419d124a37fcc71/pr-8200 upstream/3.9

4. Now, cherry-pick PR Ensure websocket transport is closed when client does not close it #8200 contents into that branch:

   $ git cherry-pick -x 6ec4747a02955dbf227fb66f4419d124a37fcc71

   If it'll yell at you with something like fatal: Commit 6ec4747a02955dbf227fb66f4419d124a37fcc71 is a merge but no -m option was given., add -m 1 as follows instead:

   $ git cherry-pick -m1 -x 6ec4747a02955dbf227fb66f4419d124a37fcc71

5. At this point, you'll probably encounter some merge conflicts. You must
   resolve them in to preserve the patch from PR Ensure websocket transport is closed when client does not close it #8200 as close to the
   original as possible.
6. Push this branch to your fork on GitHub:

   $ git push origin patchback/backports/3.9/6ec4747a02955dbf227fb66f4419d124a37fcc71/pr-8200

7. Create a PR, ensure that the CI is green. If it's not — update it so that
   the tests and any other checks pass. This is it!
   Now relax and wait for the maintainers to process your pull request
   when they have some cycles to do reviews. Don't worry — they'll tell you if
   any improvements are necessary when the time comes!

🤖 @patchback
I'm built with octomachinery and
my source is open — https://github.com/sanitizers/patchback-github-app.

[patchback]

Backport to 3.10: 💔 cherry-picking failed — conflicts found

❌ Failed to cleanly apply 6ec4747 on top of patchback/backports/3.10/6ec4747a02955dbf227fb66f4419d124a37fcc71/pr-8200

Backporting merged PR #8200 into master

1. Ensure you have a local repo clone of your fork. Unless you cloned it
   from the upstream, this would be your origin remote.
2. Make sure you have an upstream repo added as a remote too. In these
   instructions you'll refer to it by the name upstream. If you don't
   have it, here's how you can add it:

   $ git remote add upstream https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp.git

3. Ensure you have the latest copy of upstream and prepare a branch
   that will hold the backported code:

   $ git fetch upstream
   $ git checkout -b patchback/backports/3.10/6ec4747a02955dbf227fb66f4419d124a37fcc71/pr-8200 upstream/3.10

4. Now, cherry-pick PR Ensure websocket transport is closed when client does not close it #8200 contents into that branch:

   $ git cherry-pick -x 6ec4747a02955dbf227fb66f4419d124a37fcc71

   If it'll yell at you with something like fatal: Commit 6ec4747a02955dbf227fb66f4419d124a37fcc71 is a merge but no -m option was given., add -m 1 as follows instead:

   $ git cherry-pick -m1 -x 6ec4747a02955dbf227fb66f4419d124a37fcc71

5. At this point, you'll probably encounter some merge conflicts. You must
   resolve them in to preserve the patch from PR Ensure websocket transport is closed when client does not close it #8200 as close to the
   original as possible.
6. Push this branch to your fork on GitHub:

   $ git push origin patchback/backports/3.10/6ec4747a02955dbf227fb66f4419d124a37fcc71/pr-8200

7. Create a PR, ensure that the CI is green. If it's not — update it so that
   the tests and any other checks pass. This is it!
   Now relax and wait for the maintainers to process your pull request
   when they have some cycles to do reviews. Don't worry — they'll tell you if
   any improvements are necessary when the time comes!

🤖 @patchback
I'm built with octomachinery and
my source is open — https://github.com/sanitizers/patchback-github-app.