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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Add ChanUpgradeOpen core handler. #3844
Add ChanUpgradeOpen core handler. #3844
Changes from 1 commit
b33f21f
9ffd9ee
dcffa80
85ffd3b
17191a2
112423e
77d91c2
151f71e
81215f5
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
I think once #3928 is implemented, this won't be necessary, should we add a note?
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.
I'm forced to set these myself since on completion of try/ack upgrade we're still in
FLUSHING
. Lmk if I can go about this in a different way.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.
Should we open an issue to not forget about this?
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.
totally, I was thinking of adding it in the PR for the message server handler. Can open an issue if you think it might be an odd addition there (NOTE: there's a similar case in TRY, unsure what we went with there).
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.
don't particularly like having to set up the channel in a state we want to check but I think it's a trade-off between having the handshake be performed in the malleate function vs inside the loop body.
OTOH I can add a typical handshake dance here to get them in the right states as Colin mentioned in another PR. Lmk!
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.
My experience is that it is more maintainable to use setup handlers rather than hardcoded expectations