@frenck Would it be possible for future release notes, to include a link/anchor at the top of the blog entry, for added notes of minor versions?
That would be great and would safe a lot of scrolling. Thanks in advance
EDIT to clarify in contrary to the answered post above:
What I’m asking is a simple link inside the blog post , actually easy to copy and paste while writing the news . Nothing, that would need to be changed in code or so, just a link at the top, basically a html anchor.
What’s interesting is it was possible. I seem to recall past updates (0.7X or 0.8X era I think) where clicking the release notes link from the main webpage for HA (home-assistant.io) would take you straight to the latest point release notes.
Nope, sorry, not what I meant. The post you linked is asking for the link in HA to point to the minor releases.
What I’m asking is a simple link inside the blog post, actually easy to copy and paste while writing the news. Nothing, that would need to be changed in code or so, just a link at the top, basically a html anchor.
That would save a lot of scrolling, and is simple and easy to do.
They appear now. I had to explicitly include the domain in the logbook config.
I’ve read and re-read the include / exclude rules and still don’t understand them.
I have a domain and entity exclude list, and have included some entities from the excluded domains. But I did not explicitly exclude the switch domain. Why do I have to include it?
Also the recorder include/exclude rules seem to differ from the history and logbook. I did not need to explicitly include the switch domain in the recorder, and I have history for my switches.
Very confusing.
EDIT: now shutdown / restart events are not appearing in the logbook. The were before I added the switch domain include. What do I have to include to get those back?
EDIT2: It seems that by implicitly including the switch domain I have excluded everything else.
The logic of this is completely stuffed. I give up. I’m going to exclude everything and log my own messages.
I ran into the same problem @tom_l and I believe there was another user recently posting similar frustrations. Shortly after the release of 0.112 I posted a thread about excludes/includes and asking about including a domain by default, excluding a glob, and including specific entities. No one responded but I understand now it’s because no one had tried. Well as you found the answer is you pretty much have to be explicit with everything whenever you mix and match excludes and includes.
Thanks. Is there any reason the logic for recorder includes/excludes is different from the history or logbook integrations logic for includes/excludes?
It seems to be implemented more logically for the recorder.
They are using two different data sets: logbook displays events, history displays states. Since events don’t have an entity_id (except the state in a state_changed event) and we filter by domain/entity_id we assign events to a domain to ensure filtering is possible.
Ok but I wasn’t concerned with the difference between the logbook and history logic, it’s both of them compared to the logic used for the recorder.
I can use includes and excludes for the recorder, no problem. Works quite logically. Exclude a domain, include some entities. Include a domain, exclude some entities, or a mix of both.
I can only use one of excludes or includes for the history or logbook or unintended things happen. Like nothing at all appearing if I use globs, or whole domains not being included even though I have not specified any excludes for that domain.
I found recorder filtering awkward too.
I had to exclude about 30 entities and to leave a few untouched. I though I can use glob but then spent more time inspecting actual behaviour than putting those 30 entitiies manually.
It seems
there is no option to exclude ‘all’ from particular category defined by exclude globs and include a few of them back
looks like using two stars in globs doesn’t work
logic of filtering is so complex that it’s very hard to predict final behaviour. This one with conjuction of need of restarting HA to apply the changes makes this feature effectively useless.
here is the original post (obviously without response of actuall developers responsible for this feature): Recorder - exclude selection