Well this is a contentious subject!
So I am just going to say this to the developers:
You have provided the concept!
We as the community have helped with beta testing!
We have all done a fantastic job so arguing about a name is mute. Rip flame whatever you want but from my point of view I contribute/echo the following;
We are all using home assistant! It has many installation methods. Mine is on a Debian server with docker CE and runs as hassio (I like the add-ons and snapshots) It was a third party script that helped with the original setup. I am happy that the word hate in German will be removed from the package as a whole.
I have always referred to MY installation as Home Assistant.
I was drawn in this direction because:
Python
Itās alive
A great and VERY active forum
These are not necessarily in the order of importance!
Cutting to the chase and taking into account what I have read through this thread.
It does what I want it to do!
The community is great :- one of the best I have come across.
Developers can call it what they like!
Arguing about tomAto or tomARto is as unproductive as bAth or bARth - you get in dirty and you get out clean. Or you eat the fruit because it tastes nice (even if the rest of the world sees it as a vegetable)
I know many are passionate about the effort that they have invested, I am too! But to waste all this energy on a naming convention - really?
I know I may alienate myself for these words but no offense is meant to any party. I want to see version 1.0,2.0,15.0 I like this project and it suits exactly what I am looking for!!
Ok Taras, monolith maybe not the best word to describe it. And John is right about the final result that is great. But my point is that Hass.io exists for a while, until HA moves to the Kubernetes (maybe K3S) and follows the defacto standard for orchestration. This would allow replication or automatic recovery for add-ons, for example. Hass.io doesnāt need to repeat same job, it would waste some valuable developers time.
We are ALL running the python Home Assistant code.
We have a choice of 3 deployment models: direct install, venv, or docker container. All of us are using 1 of those 3.
That is what defines this project. Anything else is optional, an add on. One could argue why does it even belong to the brand at all as itās not needed to realize the goals of Home Assistant?
I have to wonder why make a change that is not āfor the good of all our usersā as the changes revolve around aspects of the project that not everyone uses.
Iām a user/coder of Home Assistant, I didnāt care about the name since it was working so great - thanks to you all, especially @Paulus- you are my Open Source star!!!
Again, I donāt really care about the name, for me the āHome Assistant Coreā is fine, I like this kind of tech names But I have to write my doubts donāt get me wrong- I wish the best to you and that is why Iām writing this:
From the ācode refactoringā side, this is not the best move - usually we do not name one variable/function by the name of another one (and definitely not with a name of one that is currently used)- this is too confusing. So maybe donāt change one product name to another (already existing) product name
I think you should drop the āHomeā in the name, currentlly it is like āTheā in Facebook. The system can be used in so many areas (not only home). IMHOā¦
Greetings and love from Poland! You are the best automation platform ever!
I must say I like the idea of HassIO becoming Home Assistant Plus since if gives the user more than just Home Assistant (ie: add-ons). Everyone needs to remember that this is supposed to be simple for newcomers, something that seems to be an obvious plan given that there has been talk of āsimple modeā, yet not actioned with the naming convention. These newcomers often wonāt have any idea what a venv or Docker are and shouldnāt need to (even if they want to install on something other than a Raspberry Pi).
As for the above posts regarding installation method etc,since I installed HassIO on top of Ubuntu, what would my installation be called under the new naming scheme?? Apparently Iām not allowed to say HassIO in Docker on Ubuntu (because apparently Docker is implied, despite the fact that I had to install Docker as part of the processā¦)
What happens to the people who only install Home Assistant Core and then ask for help only to be told āwell how did you installā vs people who have Home Assistant (old HassIO) (has add-ons etc.) and supposedly donāt have to explain the install method despite there being multiple ways to get there, ie: Ubuntu/Docker/HassIO (now only Home Assistantā¦ )
This new naming is not right as mentioned regarding the āruleā of rebranding to not use an existing name for something that is actually different to the original.
I get that, I was being facetious. The issue is that someone else will install it on a RPi which will be completely different to mine in that they will have no access to an underlying Host OS and therefore advice given to me will be different to advice given to the RPi person. This is why install method needs to verbalised, yet in a post above it was said otherwise
Agreed. It was never a āmonolithā that was āsplitā to create hass.io (it was, and is, a large python application). Hass.io was created for a different purpose ā¦ and its name suggested it was somehow different from merely being Home Assistant.
Iām unfamiliar with Kubernetes but if the idea is to have hass.io> Home Assistant adopt industry standards (for managing add-ons), then that would be advantageous.
The saddest thing is the community that made this platform what it is today was completely blindsided by this change. And it doesnāt seem like any shits are being given about what the community thinks. Any valid criticism seems to get the āyou just donāt understand itā response from frenck or cogneato.
The fact, however, is: If I flash a Pi and give my father his own home automation box, what I have said to him what it runs?: Home Assistant or Hass.io
Home Assistant. It has always been Home Assistant. That has always been the common denominator between install methods. The addition of add-ons or a poorly performing DNS container does not change that.
What about the people that up until this point have been running Home Assistant in venv? Now I canāt say that I use Home Assistant anymore? This seems like a good way to ostracize the devs and users that have been comfortably using a venv install.
Not like this opinion or any others here matter anyway. Weāll just continue to get the ātough shitā response.
We have discussed this and closing this topic down for further comment.
The current flow of comments is all the same complain over and over, mainly from the same people. We do value input, but it is getting on a repeat mode at this point. We thank you for your input, however, we have made a choice (as the organization) and we are confident this is the right one.
But I have to write my doubts 
donāt get me wrong- I wish the best to you and that is why Iām writing this:
)