Correct crate versions and make CI semver test run on all crates (esp `lightning-invoice`) by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #4375 · lightningdevkit/rust-lightning

TheBlueMatt · 2026-02-03T15:03:34Z

No description provided.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-03T15:03:37Z

I've assigned @wpaulino as a reviewer!
I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.
Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.

The semver CI check is great but only checks the immediate crate in question. It doesn't catch that many of our crates depend on `lightning` and thus have actually broken semver as the types they use have changed to `lightning` 0.3. Here we hump the version of crates that have actually changed semver since 0.2. In addition to those that depend on `lightning`, `lightning-invoice`'s API has changed (but was not being checked by the semver CI task). Finally, `lightning-macros` was updated to 0.2.1, so the version is changed to 0.2.2.

codecov · 2026-02-03T22:59:41Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 86.00%. Comparing base (4800a47) to head (a123cfa).
⚠️ Report is 12 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4375 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.01% 86.00% -0.02% 
==========================================
Files 156 156 Lines 102781 102781 Branches 102781 102781 ==========================================
- Hits 88409 88394 -15 - Misses 11864 11878 +14 - Partials 2508 2509 +1

Flag	Coverage Δ
tests	`86.00% <ø> (-0.02%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-04T00:15:42Z

👋 The first review has been submitted!

Do you think this PR is ready for a second reviewer? If so, click here to assign a second reviewer.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:36:45Z

- with:
- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-blocking


No, we did this intentionally for good reason, as esplora-blocking and esplora-async are mutually exclusive for example. If you enable both, you end up just checking the async variant. I think at the time there were more features like this, e.g., BP's futures.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:40:05Z

- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-async
+ - name: Install Rust stable toolchain


Why not just stick with the appropriate Github action rather than doing something custom?

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:44:27Z

Now opened #4378 to revert the last commit, let's discuss there what parts of the changes still make sense.

TheBlueMatt · 2026-02-03T15:03:34Z

No description provided.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-03T15:03:37Z

I've assigned @wpaulino as a reviewer!
I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.
Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.

The semver CI check is great but only checks the immediate crate in question. It doesn't catch that many of our crates depend on `lightning` and thus have actually broken semver as the types they use have changed to `lightning` 0.3. Here we hump the version of crates that have actually changed semver since 0.2. In addition to those that depend on `lightning`, `lightning-invoice`'s API has changed (but was not being checked by the semver CI task). Finally, `lightning-macros` was updated to 0.2.1, so the version is changed to 0.2.2.

codecov · 2026-02-03T22:59:41Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 86.00%. Comparing base (4800a47) to head (a123cfa).
⚠️ Report is 12 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4375 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.01% 86.00% -0.02% 
==========================================
Files 156 156 Lines 102781 102781 Branches 102781 102781 ==========================================
- Hits 88409 88394 -15 - Misses 11864 11878 +14 - Partials 2508 2509 +1

Flag	Coverage Δ
tests	`86.00% <ø> (-0.02%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-04T00:15:42Z

👋 The first review has been submitted!

Do you think this PR is ready for a second reviewer? If so, click here to assign a second reviewer.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:36:45Z

- with:
- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-blocking


No, we did this intentionally for good reason, as esplora-blocking and esplora-async are mutually exclusive for example. If you enable both, you end up just checking the async variant. I think at the time there were more features like this, e.g., BP's futures.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:40:05Z

- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-async
+ - name: Install Rust stable toolchain


Why not just stick with the appropriate Github action rather than doing something custom?

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:44:27Z

Now opened #4378 to revert the last commit, let's discuss there what parts of the changes still make sense.

TheBlueMatt · 2026-02-03T15:03:34Z

No description provided.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-03T15:03:37Z

I've assigned @wpaulino as a reviewer!
I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.
Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.

The semver CI check is great but only checks the immediate crate in question. It doesn't catch that many of our crates depend on `lightning` and thus have actually broken semver as the types they use have changed to `lightning` 0.3. Here we hump the version of crates that have actually changed semver since 0.2. In addition to those that depend on `lightning`, `lightning-invoice`'s API has changed (but was not being checked by the semver CI task). Finally, `lightning-macros` was updated to 0.2.1, so the version is changed to 0.2.2.

codecov · 2026-02-03T22:59:41Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 86.00%. Comparing base (4800a47) to head (a123cfa).
⚠️ Report is 12 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4375 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.01% 86.00% -0.02% 
==========================================
Files 156 156 Lines 102781 102781 Branches 102781 102781 ==========================================
- Hits 88409 88394 -15 - Misses 11864 11878 +14 - Partials 2508 2509 +1

Flag	Coverage Δ
tests	`86.00% <ø> (-0.02%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-04T00:15:42Z

👋 The first review has been submitted!

Do you think this PR is ready for a second reviewer? If so, click here to assign a second reviewer.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:36:45Z

- with:
- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-blocking


No, we did this intentionally for good reason, as esplora-blocking and esplora-async are mutually exclusive for example. If you enable both, you end up just checking the async variant. I think at the time there were more features like this, e.g., BP's futures.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:40:05Z

- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-async
+ - name: Install Rust stable toolchain


Why not just stick with the appropriate Github action rather than doing something custom?

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:44:27Z

Now opened #4378 to revert the last commit, let's discuss there what parts of the changes still make sense.

TheBlueMatt · 2026-02-03T15:03:34Z

No description provided.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-03T15:03:37Z

I've assigned @wpaulino as a reviewer!
I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.
Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.

The semver CI check is great but only checks the immediate crate in question. It doesn't catch that many of our crates depend on `lightning` and thus have actually broken semver as the types they use have changed to `lightning` 0.3. Here we hump the version of crates that have actually changed semver since 0.2. In addition to those that depend on `lightning`, `lightning-invoice`'s API has changed (but was not being checked by the semver CI task). Finally, `lightning-macros` was updated to 0.2.1, so the version is changed to 0.2.2.

codecov · 2026-02-03T22:59:41Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 86.00%. Comparing base (4800a47) to head (a123cfa).
⚠️ Report is 12 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4375 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.01% 86.00% -0.02% 
==========================================
Files 156 156 Lines 102781 102781 Branches 102781 102781 ==========================================
- Hits 88409 88394 -15 - Misses 11864 11878 +14 - Partials 2508 2509 +1

Flag	Coverage Δ
tests	`86.00% <ø> (-0.02%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-04T00:15:42Z

👋 The first review has been submitted!

Do you think this PR is ready for a second reviewer? If so, click here to assign a second reviewer.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:36:45Z

- with:
- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-blocking


No, we did this intentionally for good reason, as esplora-blocking and esplora-async are mutually exclusive for example. If you enable both, you end up just checking the async variant. I think at the time there were more features like this, e.g., BP's futures.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:40:05Z

- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-async
+ - name: Install Rust stable toolchain


Why not just stick with the appropriate Github action rather than doing something custom?

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:44:27Z

Now opened #4378 to revert the last commit, let's discuss there what parts of the changes still make sense.

TheBlueMatt · 2026-02-03T15:03:34Z

No description provided.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-03T15:03:37Z

I've assigned @wpaulino as a reviewer!
I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.
Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.

The semver CI check is great but only checks the immediate crate in question. It doesn't catch that many of our crates depend on `lightning` and thus have actually broken semver as the types they use have changed to `lightning` 0.3. Here we hump the version of crates that have actually changed semver since 0.2. In addition to those that depend on `lightning`, `lightning-invoice`'s API has changed (but was not being checked by the semver CI task). Finally, `lightning-macros` was updated to 0.2.1, so the version is changed to 0.2.2.

codecov · 2026-02-03T22:59:41Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 86.00%. Comparing base (4800a47) to head (a123cfa).
⚠️ Report is 12 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4375 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.01% 86.00% -0.02% 
==========================================
Files 156 156 Lines 102781 102781 Branches 102781 102781 ==========================================
- Hits 88409 88394 -15 - Misses 11864 11878 +14 - Partials 2508 2509 +1

Flag	Coverage Δ
tests	`86.00% <ø> (-0.02%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-04T00:15:42Z

👋 The first review has been submitted!

Do you think this PR is ready for a second reviewer? If so, click here to assign a second reviewer.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:36:45Z

- with:
- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-blocking


No, we did this intentionally for good reason, as esplora-blocking and esplora-async are mutually exclusive for example. If you enable both, you end up just checking the async variant. I think at the time there were more features like this, e.g., BP's futures.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:40:05Z

- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-async
+ - name: Install Rust stable toolchain


Why not just stick with the appropriate Github action rather than doing something custom?

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:44:27Z

Now opened #4378 to revert the last commit, let's discuss there what parts of the changes still make sense.

TheBlueMatt · 2026-02-03T15:03:34Z

No description provided.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-03T15:03:37Z

I've assigned @wpaulino as a reviewer!
I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.
Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.

The semver CI check is great but only checks the immediate crate in question. It doesn't catch that many of our crates depend on `lightning` and thus have actually broken semver as the types they use have changed to `lightning` 0.3. Here we hump the version of crates that have actually changed semver since 0.2. In addition to those that depend on `lightning`, `lightning-invoice`'s API has changed (but was not being checked by the semver CI task). Finally, `lightning-macros` was updated to 0.2.1, so the version is changed to 0.2.2.

codecov · 2026-02-03T22:59:41Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 86.00%. Comparing base (4800a47) to head (a123cfa).
⚠️ Report is 12 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4375 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.01% 86.00% -0.02% 
==========================================
Files 156 156 Lines 102781 102781 Branches 102781 102781 ==========================================
- Hits 88409 88394 -15 - Misses 11864 11878 +14 - Partials 2508 2509 +1

Flag	Coverage Δ
tests	`86.00% <ø> (-0.02%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-04T00:15:42Z

👋 The first review has been submitted!

Do you think this PR is ready for a second reviewer? If so, click here to assign a second reviewer.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:36:45Z

- with:
- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-blocking


No, we did this intentionally for good reason, as esplora-blocking and esplora-async are mutually exclusive for example. If you enable both, you end up just checking the async variant. I think at the time there were more features like this, e.g., BP's futures.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:40:05Z

- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-async
+ - name: Install Rust stable toolchain


Why not just stick with the appropriate Github action rather than doing something custom?

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:44:27Z

Now opened #4378 to revert the last commit, let's discuss there what parts of the changes still make sense.

TheBlueMatt · 2026-02-03T15:03:34Z

No description provided.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-03T15:03:37Z

I've assigned @wpaulino as a reviewer!
I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.
Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.

The semver CI check is great but only checks the immediate crate in question. It doesn't catch that many of our crates depend on `lightning` and thus have actually broken semver as the types they use have changed to `lightning` 0.3. Here we hump the version of crates that have actually changed semver since 0.2. In addition to those that depend on `lightning`, `lightning-invoice`'s API has changed (but was not being checked by the semver CI task). Finally, `lightning-macros` was updated to 0.2.1, so the version is changed to 0.2.2.

codecov · 2026-02-03T22:59:41Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 86.00%. Comparing base (4800a47) to head (a123cfa).
⚠️ Report is 12 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4375 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.01% 86.00% -0.02% 
==========================================
Files 156 156 Lines 102781 102781 Branches 102781 102781 ==========================================
- Hits 88409 88394 -15 - Misses 11864 11878 +14 - Partials 2508 2509 +1

Flag	Coverage Δ
tests	`86.00% <ø> (-0.02%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-04T00:15:42Z

👋 The first review has been submitted!

Do you think this PR is ready for a second reviewer? If so, click here to assign a second reviewer.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:36:45Z

- with:
- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-blocking


No, we did this intentionally for good reason, as esplora-blocking and esplora-async are mutually exclusive for example. If you enable both, you end up just checking the async variant. I think at the time there were more features like this, e.g., BP's futures.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:40:05Z

- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-async
+ - name: Install Rust stable toolchain


Why not just stick with the appropriate Github action rather than doing something custom?

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:44:27Z

Now opened #4378 to revert the last commit, let's discuss there what parts of the changes still make sense.

TheBlueMatt · 2026-02-03T15:03:34Z

No description provided.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-03T15:03:37Z

I've assigned @wpaulino as a reviewer!
I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.
Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.

The semver CI check is great but only checks the immediate crate in question. It doesn't catch that many of our crates depend on `lightning` and thus have actually broken semver as the types they use have changed to `lightning` 0.3. Here we hump the version of crates that have actually changed semver since 0.2. In addition to those that depend on `lightning`, `lightning-invoice`'s API has changed (but was not being checked by the semver CI task). Finally, `lightning-macros` was updated to 0.2.1, so the version is changed to 0.2.2.

codecov · 2026-02-03T22:59:41Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 86.00%. Comparing base (4800a47) to head (a123cfa).
⚠️ Report is 12 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4375 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.01% 86.00% -0.02% 
==========================================
Files 156 156 Lines 102781 102781 Branches 102781 102781 ==========================================
- Hits 88409 88394 -15 - Misses 11864 11878 +14 - Partials 2508 2509 +1

Flag	Coverage Δ
tests	`86.00% <ø> (-0.02%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

ldk-reviews-bot · 2026-02-04T00:15:42Z

👋 The first review has been submitted!

Do you think this PR is ready for a second reviewer? If so, click here to assign a second reviewer.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:36:45Z

- with:
- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-blocking


No, we did this intentionally for good reason, as esplora-blocking and esplora-async are mutually exclusive for example. If you enable both, you end up just checking the async variant. I think at the time there were more features like this, e.g., BP's futures.

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:40:05Z

- manifest-path: lightning-transaction-sync/Cargo.toml
- feature-group: only-explicit-features
- features: esplora-async
+ - name: Install Rust stable toolchain


Why not just stick with the appropriate Github action rather than doing something custom?

tnull · 2026-02-04T08:44:27Z

Now opened #4378 to revert the last commit, let's discuss there what parts of the changes still make sense.

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 48f1245 to 8691cbaCompare February 3, 2026 15:09

ldk-reviews-bot requested a review from wpaulino February 3, 2026 15:14

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch 2 times, most recently from 21d443f to 19c29dfCompare February 3, 2026 15:49

Check semver of all workspace crates rather than an explicit list
a123cfa

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 19c29df to a123cfaCompare February 3, 2026 15:51

wpaulino approved these changes Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

wpaulino merged commit f43803d into lightningdevkit:mainFeb 4, 2026
21 checks passed

tnull reviewed Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 48f1245 to 8691cbaCompare February 3, 2026 15:09

ldk-reviews-bot requested a review from wpaulino February 3, 2026 15:14

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch 2 times, most recently from 21d443f to 19c29dfCompare February 3, 2026 15:49

Check semver of all workspace crates rather than an explicit list
a123cfa

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 19c29df to a123cfaCompare February 3, 2026 15:51

wpaulino approved these changes Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

wpaulino merged commit f43803d into lightningdevkit:mainFeb 4, 2026
21 checks passed

tnull reviewed Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 48f1245 to 8691cbaCompare February 3, 2026 15:09

ldk-reviews-bot requested a review from wpaulino February 3, 2026 15:14

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch 2 times, most recently from 21d443f to 19c29dfCompare February 3, 2026 15:49

Check semver of all workspace crates rather than an explicit list
a123cfa

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 19c29df to a123cfaCompare February 3, 2026 15:51

wpaulino approved these changes Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

wpaulino merged commit f43803d into lightningdevkit:mainFeb 4, 2026
21 checks passed

tnull reviewed Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 48f1245 to 8691cbaCompare February 3, 2026 15:09

ldk-reviews-bot requested a review from wpaulino February 3, 2026 15:14

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch 2 times, most recently from 21d443f to 19c29dfCompare February 3, 2026 15:49

Check semver of all workspace crates rather than an explicit list
a123cfa

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 19c29df to a123cfaCompare February 3, 2026 15:51

wpaulino approved these changes Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

wpaulino merged commit f43803d into lightningdevkit:mainFeb 4, 2026
21 checks passed

tnull reviewed Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 48f1245 to 8691cbaCompare February 3, 2026 15:09

ldk-reviews-bot requested a review from wpaulino February 3, 2026 15:14

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch 2 times, most recently from 21d443f to 19c29dfCompare February 3, 2026 15:49

Check semver of all workspace crates rather than an explicit list
a123cfa

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 19c29df to a123cfaCompare February 3, 2026 15:51

wpaulino approved these changes Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

wpaulino merged commit f43803d into lightningdevkit:mainFeb 4, 2026
21 checks passed

tnull reviewed Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 48f1245 to 8691cbaCompare February 3, 2026 15:09

ldk-reviews-bot requested a review from wpaulino February 3, 2026 15:14

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch 2 times, most recently from 21d443f to 19c29dfCompare February 3, 2026 15:49

Check semver of all workspace crates rather than an explicit list
a123cfa

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 19c29df to a123cfaCompare February 3, 2026 15:51

wpaulino approved these changes Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

wpaulino merged commit f43803d into lightningdevkit:mainFeb 4, 2026
21 checks passed

tnull reviewed Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 48f1245 to 8691cbaCompare February 3, 2026 15:09

ldk-reviews-bot requested a review from wpaulino February 3, 2026 15:14

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch 2 times, most recently from 21d443f to 19c29dfCompare February 3, 2026 15:49

Check semver of all workspace crates rather than an explicit list
a123cfa

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 19c29df to a123cfaCompare February 3, 2026 15:51

wpaulino approved these changes Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

wpaulino merged commit f43803d into lightningdevkit:mainFeb 4, 2026
21 checks passed

tnull reviewed Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 48f1245 to 8691cbaCompare February 3, 2026 15:09

ldk-reviews-bot requested a review from wpaulino February 3, 2026 15:14

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch 2 times, most recently from 21d443f to 19c29dfCompare February 3, 2026 15:49

Check semver of all workspace crates rather than an explicit list
a123cfa

TheBlueMatt force-pushed the 2026-02-version-bumps-as-required branch from 19c29df to a123cfaCompare February 3, 2026 15:51

wpaulino approved these changes Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

wpaulino merged commit f43803d into lightningdevkit:mainFeb 4, 2026
21 checks passed

tnull reviewed Feb 4, 2026
View reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Conversation

TheBlueMatt commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

ldk-reviews-bot commented Feb 3, 2026• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecovBot commented Feb 3, 2026• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

ldk-reviews-bot commented Feb 4, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

tnullFeb 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tnullFeb 4, 2026• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tnull commented Feb 4, 2026• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Uh oh!

Conversation

TheBlueMatt commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

ldk-reviews-bot commented Feb 3, 2026• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecovBot commented Feb 3, 2026• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

ldk-reviews-bot commented Feb 4, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

tnullFeb 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tnullFeb 4, 2026• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tnull commented Feb 4, 2026• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Uh oh!

Conversation

TheBlueMatt commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

ldk-reviews-bot commented Feb 3, 2026• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecovBot commented Feb 3, 2026• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

ldk-reviews-bot commented Feb 4, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

tnullFeb 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ldk-reviews-bot commented Feb 3, 2026•
edited
Loading

codecovBot commented Feb 3, 2026•
edited
Loading

tnullFeb 4, 2026•
edited
Loading

tnull commented Feb 4, 2026•
edited
Loading

ldk-reviews-bot commented Feb 3, 2026•
edited
Loading

codecovBot commented Feb 3, 2026•
edited
Loading

tnullFeb 4, 2026•
edited
Loading

tnull commented Feb 4, 2026•
edited
Loading

ldk-reviews-bot commented Feb 3, 2026•
edited
Loading

codecovBot commented Feb 3, 2026•
edited
Loading

tnullFeb 4, 2026•
edited
Loading

tnull commented Feb 4, 2026•
edited
Loading

ldk-reviews-bot commented Feb 3, 2026•
edited
Loading

codecovBot commented Feb 3, 2026•
edited
Loading

tnullFeb 4, 2026•
edited
Loading

tnull commented Feb 4, 2026•
edited
Loading