Seriously, is this April Fool's Day? How can you say, "The nice thing is, nothing breaks. All your existing automations keep working, worry-free," while also saying my automations will definitely break?
Purpose-specific triggers and conditions
Several entity triggers and conditions, part of the new purpose-specific triggers and conditions, have been renamed so their keys are consistent across all domains. The old keys no longer work.
The following triggers changed:
battery.low is now battery.became_low
battery.not_low is now battery.no_longer_low
lawn_mower.docked is now lawn_mower.returned_to_dock
schedule.turned_off is now schedule.block_ended
schedule.turned_on is now schedule.block_started
timer.time_remaining is now timer.remaining_time_reached
update.update_became_available is now update.became_available
vacuum.docked is now vacuum.returned_to_dock
The following conditions changed:
climate.target_humidity is now climate.is_target_humidity
climate.target_temperature is now climate.is_target_temperature
If an automation or script uses one of these, it will stop working until updated. To fix it, open the affected automation or script, re-select the trigger or condition (it now appears under its new name), and save. If you edit in YAML, replace the old key with the new one from the list above.
The purpose specific triggers were experimental up to this release. Those have the explicit mention that when you enable them, you need to take into account the fact that experimental features may still change.
So taking into account the things you mentioned were hidden by default and not finalized, this was a risk you chose to accept by enabling the feature.
Nothing official was broken, what was unofficial and broken they warned for in advance and again in the release notes. That is high enough a standard for me.
Indeed, that’s the right approach. As long as something is preview, make sure you understand things can break or not use it at all until it gets released.
I think y'all are missing the point. The point is not that experimental things were broken, it's that they literally said "nothing breaks." They just need to be transparent and say that some things break. E.g. Instead of saying, "The nice thing is, nothing breaks." They could've said something like, "The nice thing is, no stable features break."
I won’t speak for OP on this part, but I personally am not stressed about the fact that they break things all the time. It’s annoying to always have to deal with breaking changes, but that’s the way this software is developed, and it’s not the first software I’ve used like this. But that is not the point of this thread. It’s not a thread about, “How to cope with inaccurate blog posts.” You’re trying to answer a question nobody asked.
It’s okay for someone to say, “Hey, this thing that they said isn’t true.” Without other folks needing to berate them for believing what was said.
I think y’all think that OP is mad that they broke something. But that’s not the message in the OP.
It's true. Nothing broke for me. They blew past understanding the point so they could simp for HA. I've been using this long enough to know to always read breaking changes. I've also been using it long enough to have experienced breaking changes that they didn't announce because "we didn't feel like enough people used it for it matter." This update announcement feels like the same cavalier, flippant attitude. There are going to be people that read the announcement and believe them, then have to figure out the when, where, and how of what's suddenly broken.
Now these People have already from start got a "HeadsUp", and Now they Most likely also Saw the Changes made to the automation integration. (i mean, It was the very first , and very long "Chapter" ) ... And the headline for the release speak for it self ( If you used the LAB Features )
I Assume the People which enables Features in LABs have some courage , understanding and a "solid" approach to the "path" they've chosen, and therefore , as You, keep and eye on the "breaking changes" , as they been warned, and notified in this release, with a detailed description about the changes in the automation integration. & the "Purpose Specific Triggers"
And the "Breaking Changes" + Solution for those which have used the Purpose Specific Triggers .
For Everybody else , there is no Breaking Changes, For You Yes !
And then you open a Topic to complain about a " cavalier, flippant attitud "
You'r Welcome, im glad i "got Through ..." , maybe the People who wrote about/Presented the changes to the Automation Integration, assumed that the People which had enabled the LAB features For "Purpose Specific Triggers and Conditions" had a certain level of "awareness" and could put 2 & 2 together.
Beside even if You only had used these LAB-Test"Purpose Specific Features" in Scripts( An Integration which is not mentioned in this release ), they might also have thought you could distinct between New "Automation Integration Presentation", and "Purpose Specific Triggers" as Components ( used in The Automation Integration and Scripts )
Feel proud, You found the "Breaking Changes" and Solution to the "Obsolete" LAB feature, that you used(tested on borrowed time) in your scripts/Automation ... Which you also were Warned about could/would change, before you started.
