Discussion of Project Structure (arising from 'future of yaml' thread.)

[kanga_who (Jason)]

@SeanM

Why should “super frustrating” ever be considered an acceptable experience that shouldn’t be improved upon?.. If things are super frustrating let’s identify what those things are and come up with ways to reduce that frustration.

@SeanM I don’t disagree with you on this and don’t think I ever stated it should be hard, my concern has always been that moving in this direction removes features for long term or advanced users. If “the old ways” of using YAML can be left to coexist alongside integrations this would keep the large majority of people happy. Not everyone will, or can be pleased, but this would certainly help.

@SeanM

And another thing to keep in mind, there’s lots of others who often cannot receive the same level of help as us due to language barriers etc

Good point, this is a something I have not considered.

@SeanM

It’s been the goal for a long time now if you have been watching the State of the Union videos etc. That’s why the Automation and Script editors launched in like version ~0.40 in 2017, so that users could do things from GUI. Then came Hassio which made backups…]

Yes, could do things from the GUI, not have to do things from the GUI. I’ve watched the SOTU videos and have revisited them a number of times.

@SeanM

Making things easier is not some bad shady thing like you are implying.

I’m sure the Devs have a medium to long term roadmap in place and part of that I’m sure would be a discussions around HA being a viable business (or not).

Let me be clear - I pay for NabuCasa on 1 of 3 instances I maintain, so I am not anti revenue stream for people working long hours on the project, server costs etc, but would like some transparency on what is being given more weight in development process. If the goal is to make HA an attractive package for business purposes, be honest about that. If that is not the goal, then state that.