Skip to content
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

Add inplace replace of official Local Tuya Integration in README.md, … #451

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

fuchs-fabian
Copy link

Issue that led to this PR: rospogrigio#1879

As the current official Local Tuya integration does not work with version HA 2025.1.0 and many cannot update, many are now venturing to switch to this fork.

This fork is being developed much more actively and also works successfully in HA 2025.1.0.

To make the changeover easier, I have made a few changes directly in the README.md.

Changes

  • Add inplace replace of official Local Tuya Integration in README.md
  • Cleans-up README.md

Suggestion

Since it seems that the official repository is not really being developed further, more and more issues are being added and more and more problems are occurring, it would be nice if the documentation were expanded. For example, to include what is in the README.md of the official repository.

@xZetsubou
Copy link
Owner

xZetsubou commented Jan 5, 2025

Thanks for making this guide to new users,
I think having replace guide in discussions would be fine but ReadME is straight-forward approach of how to install it via HACS/features without scrolling with separated documentation page due to the complexity of how this integration works.

This contains many changes and I can't ensure that updating to this wouldn't break old setup for everyone. To be honest I'm surprised that the migration still works for some people.

@fuchs-fabian
Copy link
Author

So a lot of people have used this guide or this procedure. And yes, it works perfectly. 🚀

So far, no one has reported negatively that the switch went wrong.

Since more and more people are currently making the switch, I suggest adding something like this to the readme.

  • Should a disclaimer be added that it is still possible that something can go wrong and that it is therefore very, very important to have the option of going back via a backup?
  • List versions where it worked successfully?

It happens more often:

Does anyone have a step-by-step guide?

And yes here it is.

I think that if there is a guide for this directly in the repository, it inspires trust and many people feel much more confident about making the switch. And what can I say: Great work. The switch is worth it 😀

@fuchs-fabian
Copy link
Author

I understand your concerns, of course. That's why I mentioned the forums. You can still write there if it's different in another version or if it doesn't work anymore. Then you can take it out again. Thank God nothing is set in stone. Especially not in the readme. But as I said: Especially because soooo many people are switching over at the moment, directly visible help would be an advantage 🫣

@xZetsubou
Copy link
Owner

To be fair it does breaks sometimes, for example Fans after migration from upstream to this fork the min/max values converted to string and broke fan entities, this has been fixed master(a workaround has been made) but it did break something, If this is in discussions then a help would exists there.

Now here's my point of view to this, I no longer consider this part of upstream due to the massive changes in code I don't guide users to migrate to this one nor fix an issues related to migration this is an old fork I haven't used upstream for years as well.
Those who seek for step-by-step guides can find it on discussions you can see how old that topic is 😄 HA forum can be helpful as well, but migration guides/fixes aren't part of this fork job so I can't add them into ReadMe or docs.

@fuchs-fabian
Copy link
Author

Ok, I totally understand that. No problem. Then I'll just add it to the discussion, link it here and then the PR can be declined :)

@fuchs-fabian
Copy link
Author

Here is the commentary in the discussion: #79 (comment)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants