This is something that really confused me when I built my little integration: it’s a media player (i.e. configured under the media_player section in YAML), but it uses MQTT. So, the integration in this case is the media player, and the platform is MQTT, but originally it wasn’t clear to me which way around this had to be. Now I’m wondering whether I will need to update this at some point to sit under an mqtt: section. I think, the class/type/function of something should be treated differently to how it connects. I’m possibly missing something subtle here, but it seems like the concepts are getting mixed. Personally, I like to think of the domain as the top level concept, with the mechanism (templates, MQTT, REST) as secondary to that. I’ll deal with it either way, but thought I’d bring this up.
HA is moving away from YAML to UI configuration to, I assume, become more accessible to new users. It would be madness to set up lights under “Lights”, unless they were MQTT lights, in which case you had to set them up under “MQTT” (or unless they were “Templates”, etc etc). Once it’s all done, you can’t imagine a new screen where you manage all of your lights in one place.
No, its actually neither of those. Your integration is called shairpoint_sync therefore if you are trying to follow that ADR then all config for it should be under the key sharepoint_sync in configuration.yaml. So something like this:
shairpoint_sync:
name: Shairport Sync Player
topic: your/mqtt/topic
If your integration supported multiple platforms and each had their own options then it might be more like this:
shairpoint_sync:
media_player:
name: Shairport Sync Player
topic: your/mqtt/topic
sensor:
name: Shairport Sync Player sensor
topic: your/mqtt/topic
The fact that your integration uses mqtt under the hood isn’t relevant. How your integration actually communicates with its external devices/services is an implementation detail. Ideally you hide those kinds of details from the user and simply expose options that make sense without requiring the user to actually know how it works under the hood.
MQTT makes this confusing since its a communication protocol rather then a specific service. But the thing to remember is that the only config that can be under the mqtt key in configuration.yaml is stuff actually handed to the mqtt integration. You need your config to be handed to the shairpoint_sync integration not the mqtt integration so it can’t be under mqtt. It either has to be under a shairpoint_sync key or using the old style with a platform key under media_player.
Also keep in mind that ADRs apply to core integrations. ADRs are enforced by code reviews and no one is reviewing custom integrations but the author(s). If you were thinking of contributing that back to core then yea you’d need to follow the ADRs. But if you just want to leave it in HACS then you can continue doing whichever approach you prefer here.
So TIL that it’s the old way – I didn’t know that.
I agree 100% with that statement, but it seems to contradict the main point, which is to put things under a mqtt: key/section. It’s just a comms layer – like HTTP, etc. which I think is your point too:
And the above is what I’m kind of questioning or trying to understand better. I know I’ll probably not get the true answer here unless one of the devs chime in, but it’s good to hear all the explanations regardless.
True, but I personally try to follow best practices and keep the options open. It wasn’t really to talk about my contribution, but it’s an example I understand well, which was the reason I used it.
It’s besides the point. I know this, and I’m fine with that and yes that’s the reason it’s being done. I need to add the config flow to my stuff – but that’s another topic.
I don’t understand why this seems illogical – or mad.
I have a number of MQTT devices and would like to get ahead of 2022.9 and not repeat my debacle of waiting too long to change my Z-Wave stuff.
So, what’s wrong here?
Is there a dictionary or Rosetta stone that helps interpret the error messages?
What is a <block end> and a '<block mapping start>' ?
[Edit to fix forum software munging my question].
I didn’t notice that my earlier question was munged by the forum software, so I’ll ask again in code tags.
Also your suggested fix produced this error:
The system cannot restart because the configuration is not valid: Error loading /config/configuration.yaml: while parsing a block mapping in "/config/configuration.yaml", line 262, column 7 expected <block end>, but found '<block mapping start>' in "/config/configuration.yaml", line 263, column 8
Is there a codex or universal translator to help understand, just what is a <block end> and a '<block mapping start>' ?
The indentation and formatting in breaking-changes is correct. The indentation in your original question was fine, your issue was the dash not having a space between your field.
Yaml only cares about relative indentation. These yaml examples are functionally the same:
