I’m not blaming anything. I’m reporting findings. So far we received no help. Regardless how much I’m trying I can’t see your contribution helpful too. This is why I’m asking why do you do that.
At the end It really doesn’t matter whitch component is literally responsible for this behaviour - all which may influence are developed/provided by devs of ha. The problem however is manifested by serious problems with most recent mqtt addon and disappeared by installing previous version. And it’s reproducible by tents of people who encounter this issue.
So it’s not about helping in fixing issue but about attempting to change my mind?
Anyway what’s the point of saying this on this forum since it’s known that devs focus rather on what is reported to GitHub. Have you reported details of your installation to help in resolving issue by comparison?
I am not the person asserting that everyone has this problem and that the addon should be withdrawn and rolled back - you are. The point you are missing is that not everyone has this problem.
With v 5.1 nobody had problems. With v5.1.1 a lot of users have (I never said everybody has). That’s the difference.
The v5.1.1 should have been rolled back especially because devs had/have obviously no idea what is happening (especially immediately after release). They had no enough data to say what impact the issue will have and on what percentage of installations.
Rolling wrongly performing component back - even if impacting part of installations - is not something unusual.
It’s you who asserting that such actions can be taken only if majority (ie You) is affected
The fact that it only affects some users indicates it’s a combination of issues. In the end it may be proven that the issue isn’t the mqtt addon but something else interacting with it that changed. I seem to remember someone saying something about zigbee or zwave? Do you use either of those?
I was using just MQTT with discovery of Tasmota devices with no issues and on the weekend I switched over to using the Tasmota integration and that is also working with no problems.
If it was just a faulty addon affecting everyone I’d agree it should be rolled back however that isn’t the case and the culprit may well be something else and not the mqtt addon.
I said that it has been reported by zigbee2mqtt and zwave2mqtt users independently on other forums, because they had no clue that the root-cause of their problems might be related to mqtt addon.
If it was just a faulty addon affecting everyone I’d agree it should be rolled back
what ever the outcome of this small bi-lateral ‘fitty’ (dutch, sorry) , it is rather sad no dev in the GitHub issue seems to be interested in this. ( On Discord we had some help, but this wasn’t successful in the end, and now we’re in the dark once more)
Many users have posted in various issues and posts here, all trying their best, posting their experience, and details about their installations. In order to be able to deduct whether it is the MQTT add-on or a set of special combinations.
So far, the various installation methods that have displayed this degraded (at best) or faulty (at worst) behavior in this issue report have at least shown it is not only one type of installation that is suffering this. All the more reason the code owners and devs of this core code could be at least be showing a more inquisitive position for the matter. It is after all a rather fundamental Add-on.
It is as you yourself said: this will only fester onward if not solved at the root now. The solution might be user sided, but it is not entirely impossible it is a core code issue. Reports at least point in that direction…
Nothing but the password schema was changed between 5.1 and 5.1.1. A 2 line code change, one of the lines switched 5.1 to 5.1.1, the other changed the validation from 'str' to 'password'. That means, nothing would be updated in the container between the 2 versions, just validation on the password which only occurs when users save their configuration. I.e. Mosquitto and all it’s contents are identical as well as the startup process. There’s not much to investigate with the information that has been given. FWIW, I don’t see this issue myself.
Thanks Petro, yes, thats what the update indicates, but I believe to have read in one of the Issues on 5.11 that a whole lot more in de underlying code was changed. Have to go look that up, but as said, that already has been identified.
Ok, if changes to the base image are true then you should wait until the issue is identified. Until then, talking about it to death doesn’t help anything. Constantly asking for updates from the devs does not help anyone. The issue is logged, the information is out there.
If the people who know how to fix these issues cannot reproduce the issue, then there’s nothing for them to identify as the problem to fix. All you can do in these situations is be patient. The issue will be found and will be solved at some point. Just because you aren’t being hand held through this process does not mean that people are ignoring the issue. A clear indication of that is that the issues have not been closed.
Until this happens, downgrade to 5.1.0 and patiently wait. Thanks.
Yeah… really great idea. Shouldn’t devs make it alive?
This is why v5.1.1 should be rolled back. To make sure no other (new) people will be affected by the issue. It will give devs as much time as they need to fix that. And github issue wouldn’t need to be refreshed just to avoid automatic shutdown.
Maxym you shouldn’t even bother replying at this point. You’ve made it clear that you dislike the people who make the changes and nothing you’ve offered at this point has been relevant other than slinging insults that fit within the COC. You put yourself into this corner and your opinion has little weight at this point.
Never said that. I rather dislike part of community which accepts half-baked features and supports lack of any care about final quality or user experience.
This is insulting.
Now, I don’t care. It did make sense immediately after issue recognition. Now it’s only about how many people more will experience the issue.