spacebear

>> v2 receiver is still technically not backwards-compatible because we can't guarantee the same behavior for other v1 sender implementations > > Can you expand on this? How would you...

This specific mutation is now skipped as of [1f39170](https://github.com/payjoin/rust-payjoin/commit/1f39170c8840b02ca1870f3e9ce20d10ac836a02), so this issue is still alive until a better solution is found.

Somewhat related is https://github.com/payjoin/rust-payjoin/issues/844: expanding test coverage is great but we should ensure that our tests are high leverage and test important functionality/requirements

@DanGould Summary of changes since your last review: - Fixed the `try_fold` issue you brought up. - Removed the `input_type` and `sequence` fields from the ContextV1 and RequestContext structs, as...

Thanks - fixed the clippy warnings and test name.

Closed by #1020

Apologies for the slow progress lately, I was afk most of last week so didn't make progress but I'm currently working on using the existing RPC client implementation instead of...

Aside from the workarounds in that commit it's been relatively smooth. The hackiest workaround was to just remove solidity stuff from the `docker:start` command since it was in our way...

Update: we ran into some difficulties implementing session persistence (full write-up [here](https://github.com/orgs/payjoin/discussions/689)), and we're making a concerted effort to address these in the core library ([draft PR](https://github.com/payjoin/rust-payjoin/pull/675/files)). Getting persistence right...

> Are we satisfied that test_process_proposal_when_payee_output_has_disallowed_output_substitution() is sufficient in its completeness It looks complete to me (and also potentially duplicated by [`test_output_substitution`](https://github.com/spacebear21/rust-payjoin/blob/69755571a28f1b8773e8bc4882a36a5528aef251/payjoin/src/send/mod.rs#L723)?). Have the other open items in the checklist...