[ISY] current open issues

[HentschelT]

Hi Craig,

based on the conversation here: https://forum.universal-devices.com/topic/21026-isy-binding-for-openhab-2/?page=3 I've put together a list of things that could use some attention in the ISY binding: http://www.hentschel.net/w/index.php?title=OpenHAB_ISY_Binding_rework

One part (Scene updates) is already done, however it seems the part that the binding currently doesn't add/remove devices/scenes/variable based on ISY updates (and that it isn't possible to rescan an existing OHAB bridge) is probably the most pressing.

I think I got some time in the next couple weeks to make a pass at it, just wanted your feedback before I head in the wrong direction.

Cheers,
-Th

[HentschelT]

Aside from Scene updates, I've started on automatic node add/remove based on web socket updates. Still a few more things needed, initial commit is here: HentschelT@0664c11

[craigham]

Hi Thomas,

I think I will have a little time in about 6 hours to take a look.

However, one thing which would make this easier is if you pull my current branch and commit against that so I don’t have to until grade my master to merge your PRs.

I will try to take a look a look at all of this so on so I can provide feedback. Thanks for the efforts and forthcoming contributions.

Craig

[HentschelT]

Hi Craig,

no prob, take your time and enjoy the vacation. I also closed the PR re: scene updates - it has a problem, in that it uses insteon addresses w/o device id's to map to scenes. This works for devices that only have one device id (channel), but other devices may trigger unrelated scenes. I'll reopen another PR once that is fixed (it's fixed, but I'm in the middle of testing) along with other changes in the link, and after merging your changes against master.

Along the ways, I pretty much got thru the list, just in the middle of testing since the changes are somewhat substantial.

-Th

[HentschelT]

Hi Craig,

created PR here: #131
I pretty much went thru the list on my web page, everything is implemented, also did a couple days of testing on my system. Would be good if you could test this on your system too when you get back.

This PR now also has pulled+merged your current master.

Cheers,
-Th

[craigham]

Thomas, Could you do PRs on the isy-binding branch instead. When I commit to that branch my auto build (shippable.io) creates a binding jar automatically. That branch is a long running one for isy binding code. This allows me to have 3 bindings that I can fairly easily work on whenever I can. Sorry for not making that clear earlier, it’s just hard to sneak in time while away. The improvements look great, look forward to kicking the tires when I get back Cheers, Craig

…

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 4:37 AM Thomas Hentschel ***@***.***> wrote: Hi Craig, created PR here: #131 <#131> I pretty much went thru the list on my web page, everything is implemented, also did a couple days of testing on my system. Would be good if you could test this on your system too when you get back. This PR now also has pulled+merged your current master. Cheers, -Th — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#130 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AK5qXufRtGJd7q-UCXbmEhNia00IoowHks5txOtmgaJpZM4T10n_> .

[HentschelT]

No prob, moved the PR merge target to the isy-binding branch. Also merged in the (single) change on the branch before.

Take your time, and enjoy vacation

Cheers,
-Th

[craigham]

Hi Thomas,

I think you misunderstood what I was asking for. It would be great if you could only check in your commits to a pr off of my existing isy-binding branch. This would mean I would accept maybe 5 commits that only you would have made, instead of the 200 or whatever of the current master over at openHAB. When I get time I will get my own master sync’d up with OpenHAB. Last time I checked there was something like 180k lines changed since I brought my fork of master up to date. I should be able to just look at your commits and merge them in, which will trigger my build tool to make the binding builds.

Does that make sense? Sorry for slowing you down, but It is much better if we can isolate just the isy-binding specific commits imho.

[craigham]

If you bring up the isy-binding branch via the GitHub website and look at the commits, you will see that since the branch was committed only the check-ins that the various contributors (including yourself earlier) show in a nice list without all the other master branch work others are working on. That is what I am trying to preserve. When/if the time comes that the openHAB master branch would accept this binding, I can rebase all our changes and have it ready for the merge to master.

You should still be able to have your own master in whatever synced state you wish if you keep working off my isy-binding branch for this work.