Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 25.97403% with 57 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 58.51%. Comparing base (ddab407) to head (237d346).

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev    #2235      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   58.79%   58.51%   -0.28%     
==========================================
  Files          60       61       +1     
  Lines        9132     9209      +77     
==========================================
+ Hits         5369     5389      +20     
- Misses       3763     3820      +57     

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

OK Ready for review @prusnak @dni

See proof of work video attached here:

I rebased the branch on top of current dev to remove conflicts.

@bitkarrot can you please have a look at typing failures?

lnbits/wallets/zbd.py:13:5: F811 Redefinition of unused `PaymentStatus` from line 8
lnbits/wallets/zbd.py:121: error: Incompatible return value type (got "InvoiceResponse", expected "PaymentResponse")  [return-value]

@bitkarrot can you please have a look at typing failures?

I went ahead and fixed them in 6b2f3eb

huge! thanks @bitkarrot for taking this on. going to find some time to spin up local LNBits and test further 👍

Amazing work. Async invoice stream needs attention though, for the invoice listeners. Not sure if its possible, it should be.

Rebased on top of dev to get rid of bundle conflict.

rebased on top of current dev branch to resolve conflicts

Let's merge so we don't have to keep rebasing it. // cc @dni

Will make pytest a separate PR that can be applied to all Wallet integrations,
if @prusnak has itchy fingers and can't wait to merge this one. ;)

Thanks @motorina0 . will fix the rest in the morning, right now too fried.

LGTM Thank you for adding this implementation.

The only important open topic is: https://github.com/lnbits/lnbits/pull/2235/files#r1497611632

OK changes requested by @motorina0 done.

Let's merge so we don't have to keep rebasing it. // cc @dni

Um, yes. I tried to resolve the conflicts in the bundle.min.js but gave up, not sure how to do this best way.
@prusnak

Um, yes. I tried to resolve the conflicts in the bundle.min.js but gave up, not sure how to do this best way.

Easiest way is to just drop the chore: make bundle during the rebase and recreate it again from scratch by running make bundle - that's also the reason why you want to have it as a separate commit.

PS: I just did the process above to resolve the conflicts.

Great work, merged!

Thank you! will do that next time :D

Easiest way is to just drop the chore: make bundle during the rebase and recreate it again from scratch by running make bundle - that's also the reason why you want to have it as a separate commit.

PS: I just did the process above to resolve the conflicts.