-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
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
RFC: Additional attribute for mower devices #18
Comments
@Jpsy I'm really curious about all automations you have running since you're using quite some attributes of all entities :-) I personally don't have any automations yet relying on these attributes. As far as I remember I didn't condense any data into one datafield, but there are quite some differences between the api used by the official app at the time I did the reverse engineering. There was even data available which isn't in the official API. I do see the value of this commodity attribute, on the other hand maybe keep the implementation "pure" and create a "virtual sensor" in HASS. Bottom line, no strong preference from my side. |
I think it makes sense, but I haven't thought too much about it. Perhaps just call it Could you open an issue in the new repository (py-smart-gardena/hass-gardena-smart-system) and continue there please? |
py-smart-gardena/hass-gardena-smart-system#13 So this issue can be closed. |
RFC for a new, combined attribute for mower devices.
I especially ask @osks and @wijnandtop here for feedback.
Currently we have two attributes that both provide information about the current state of the mower:
activity
andlast_error_code
. The separation is somewhat artificial, as whenever there is a real error,activity
will switch toNONE
. Consider the following examples...Example: Normal operation
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1806058/83307809-c319b700-a205-11ea-9a07-ca1aa3f71711.png)
Example: Error condition
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1806058/83307705-9a91bd00-a205-11ea-907d-c448ea5a1152.png)
In my automations I find myself again and again looking at both attributes to derive the full mower status. In the previous custom component of @wijnandtop we had that information condensed into a single data point - the state of the mower. Working on my automations I come to the conclusion that this was closer to reality than spreading the information over two attributes.
My suggestion is to add (!) a third attribute that will compile the information of both attributes into one. When
activity != "NONE"
, the new attribute would copyactivity
. Otherwise it would containlast_error_code
. The existing attributes would not be touched or removed. We would not lose anything and would gain a condensed data endpoint.Does this make sense to you?
If you agree, what would be your proposals for the attribute name - e.g.
activity_or_error
,combined_status
,status_unified
, ...?Please comment.
I would create the code and issue a PR.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: