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

Feature-gate time use also in ElectrumSyncClient #2817

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 9, 2024

Conversation

tnull
Copy link
Contributor

@tnull tnull commented Jan 9, 2024

Previously, #2799 introduced the time feature to gate the use of SystemTime dependent APIs in EsploraSyncClient.
It however omitted doing the same for the Electrum side of things. Here, we address this oversight and make things symmetrical.

A previous commit introduced the `time` feature to gate the use of
`SystemTime` dependent APIs in `EsploraSyncClient`. It however omitted
doing the same for the Electrum side of things. Here, we address this
oversight.
@tnull tnull added this to the 0.0.120 milestone Jan 9, 2024
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (78ac48c) 88.46% compared to head (2bd1213) 88.45%.

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2817      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   88.46%   88.45%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         114      114              
  Lines       91946    91946              
  Branches    91946    91946              
==========================================
- Hits        81341    81331      -10     
- Misses       8101     8110       +9     
- Partials     2504     2505       +1     

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

@TheBlueMatt TheBlueMatt merged commit 0d513fd into lightningdevkit:main Jan 9, 2024
15 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.

3 participants