One final fix + cut 0.0.103 #1153
Conversation
TheBlueMatt
force-pushed
the
2021-11-0.0.103
branch
from
db7b9f3 to
b5ae861
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1153 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 90.15% 90.14% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 70 70
Lines 36386 36386
==========================================
- Hits 32804 32801 -3
- Misses 3582 3585 +3
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
TheBlueMatt
force-pushed
the
2021-11-0.0.103
branch
2 times, most recently
from
e4511b0 to
b43e814
Compare
|
ACK b43e814 |
TheBlueMatt
force-pushed
the
2021-11-0.0.103
branch
from
b43e814 to
2b837bb
Compare
|
Squashed without diff. Will land after CI 🎉 |
| ## API Updates | ||
| * This release is almost entirely focused on a new API in the | ||
| `lightning-invoice` crate - the `InvoicePayer`. `InvoicePayer` is a | ||
| struct which takes a reference to a `ChannelManager` and a `NetworkGraph` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should replace NetworkGraph with Router. I almost wonder if we should move the Router trait to the lightning crate.
| * If a payment is sent, creating an outbound HTLC and sending it to our | ||
| counterparty (implying the `ChannelMonitor` was persisted on disk), but the | ||
| `ChannelManager` was not persisted prior to shutdown/crash, no | ||
| `Event::PaymentPathFailed` event will be generated if the HTLC is eventually | ||
| failed on chain (#1104). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems to be worded in terms of what the bug was whereas the previous bullet is worded in terms of how the bug was fixed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yea, we've generally worded in terms of the bug, but I wasn't really sure how to word the previous in terms of the bug and still have it be clear. I'll try, though.
4 participants
No description provided.