Add-on categories #1623
Replies: 5 comments
-
I would actually tend to say that the referenced documentation is not correct; Instead of I'd therefore say that your request is rather to define a new add-on category as you rightly say that a currency provider does not really fit into any of the existing ones. Wdyt? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Well, we also use the same categories (including This has been at least the case since openhab/openhab-core#2508, it was named |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hm, ok, so despite openhab/openhab-core#2508 claiming to fix inconsistencies, we still have quite some inconsistencies... But to come to a solution for your problem at hand: What do you think about my reasoning above for the currency provider? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Yes, a simple thing would be possible with (extensible) channels for the current exchange rate between two currencies (both configuration options of the channel). The required API key could be a binding-configuration parameter (used for the service), because it makes no sense to have two different API keys for retrieving the exact same data. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
We already have such bridges, things and channels for astronomical events, weather, and solar forecasts. IMHO an exchange rate provider is no different from those. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I just came across a question that I could not answer myself. According to the documentation we have the following add-on types:
automation
,binding
,misc
,persistence
,transform
,ui
andvoice
. In openhab-addons we use the following bundle-prefixes:org.openhab.automation
,org.openhab.binding
,org.openhab.io
,org.openhab.persistence
,org.openhab.transform
,org.openhab.voice
(andorg.openhab.ui
in openhab-webui). Exceptmisc
there is a match in a repository, but in the repository we haveio
.I am currently developing a new add-on which is a
CurrencyProvider
, which is not a binding (no things) and would fit in themisc
category. Butorg.openhab.io
feels wrong, because it contains add-ons that integrate other eco-systems like HomeKit or Alexa.My question is: should we introduce
org.openhab.misc
and eventually re-factor the existingorg.openhab.io
add-ons to that?Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions