-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 412
Introduce Event Model for Offers Flow #3833
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
Open
shaavan
wants to merge
9
commits into
lightningdevkit:main
Choose a base branch
from
shaavan:currency
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+684
−156
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
468aa97
f: Introduce create_invoice_builder_from_invoice_request
shaavan 37bbd7c
Use create_invoice_builder_from_invoice in ChannelManager
shaavan b85de26
Update invoice amount setter so that custom amount can be specified
shaavan f2b8f96
Introduce Invoice/InvoiceRequest amount_source
shaavan abffc78
Introduce OfferEvents
shaavan aabc42e
Introduce FlowConfigs
shaavan 5fc6716
Introduce async handling determiners for Invoice/InvoiceRequest
shaavan 0f364bc
Introduce the determiners call in ChannelManager
shaavan 832db71
Introduce ChannelManager::new_with_flow
shaavan File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm... so the user may want to handle this asynchronously because they just need to verify that an amount (or supply that is) is sufficient for the offer's currency denomination. In that case, we should really have some function that continues the code below (i.e. creating a payment hash / secret, building the invoice, and enqueuing it to be sent).
Another reason is they want to supply their own payment hash. Similarly, they would need to build the invoice and enqueue it for sending. They may be even want to customize the invoice in some other ways using the builder.
I'm not quite sure how we want to do this. For the first case, it seems we should make it easy for them, which means they would need to call something on
ChannelManager
to continue the flow. Whereas, the second case is more about calling methods onOffersMessageFlow
. But it would be weird for the former since the events' docs would need to referenceChannelManager
.