Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Follow-ups to #3436 #3493

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 19, 2024
Merged

Conversation

tnull
Copy link
Contributor

@tnull tnull commented Dec 17, 2024

Closes #3488.

Follow-ups to #3436:

  • We address some minor mistakes that made it into the docs before.

We address some minor mistakes that made it into the docs before.
@TheBlueMatt
Copy link
Collaborator

Still needs a fix for #3436 (comment) and #3436 (comment)

@valentinewallace valentinewallace added this to the 0.1 milestone Dec 17, 2024
When a peer misbehaves/sends bogus data we reply with an error message
and insert it to the ignored list.

Here, we avoid having this list grow unboundedly over time by removing
peers again once they disconnect, allowing them a second chance upon
reconnection.
Previously, we wouldn't set the field as we aren't yet making use of it.
Here, we start setting the field. To this end, we make `best_block` an
`RwLock<Option<BestBlock>>` rather than `Option<RwLock<BestBlock>>`.
@tnull
Copy link
Contributor Author

tnull commented Dec 18, 2024

Still needs a fix for #3436 (comment) and #3436 (comment)

Done.

arik-so
arik-so previously approved these changes Dec 19, 2024
TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt previously approved these changes Dec 19, 2024
@@ -2,13 +2,18 @@

The goal of this crate is to provide types and primitives to integrate a spec-compliant LSP with an LDK-based node. To this end, this crate provides client-side as well as service-side logic to implement the [LSP specifications].

**Note**: Service-side support is currently considered "beta", i.e., not fully
ready for producttion use.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
ready for producttion use.
ready for production use.

lightning-liquidity/src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
As a few things are missing (most importantly persistence), we add notes
that the service-side integration is currently considered 'beta'.
@tnull tnull dismissed stale reviews from TheBlueMatt and arik-so via dd91418 December 19, 2024 16:12
@tnull tnull force-pushed the 2024-12-3436-followup branch from 508ee8c to dd91418 Compare December 19, 2024 16:12
@tnull
Copy link
Contributor Author

tnull commented Dec 19, 2024

Force-pushed the following changes:

> git diff-tree -U2 508ee8c8f dd9141846
diff --git a/lightning-liquidity/README.md b/lightning-liquidity/README.md
index c53a9f2ad..dd74ba830 100644
--- a/lightning-liquidity/README.md
+++ b/lightning-liquidity/README.md
@@ -4,5 +4,5 @@ The goal of this crate is to provide types and primitives to integrate a spec-co

 **Note**: Service-side support is currently considered "beta", i.e., not fully
-ready for producttion use.
+ready for production use.

 Currently the following specifications are supported:
diff --git a/lightning-liquidity/src/lib.rs b/lightning-liquidity/src/lib.rs
index 95686fcc5..520c20098 100644
--- a/lightning-liquidity/src/lib.rs
+++ b/lightning-liquidity/src/lib.rs
@@ -12,5 +12,5 @@
 //!
 //! **Note**: Service-side support is currently considered "beta", i.e., not fully ready for
-//! producttion use.
+//! production use.
 //!
 //! Currently the following specifications are supported:

@TheBlueMatt TheBlueMatt merged commit d414ba9 into lightningdevkit:main Dec 19, 2024
16 of 19 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

lightning-liquidity followups
4 participants