If by “mild” you mean I just have to ignore decisions that I think are harmful to the user base then sorry that’s not going to happen.
I’m not disrespectful to anyone here (I wish I could say that courtesy was always returned to me as well but that’s not always been the case, unfortunately). I state my considered points as well and as thoroughly as I can. If there are replies to those statements then I try my best to make my best argument for my position. If you or others don’t like it then I’m sorry to hear that.
Don’t get me wrong I know I’ve made a few “snarky” posts a few times. They are always meant to make a point and aren’t what I would consider “over-reacting”.
It would be nice for you to show where you think my posts aren’t appropriate (feel free to do it in PM if you want).
I’m not really sure why I should have been at that point.
In every conversation I’ve ever personally seen on this type of topic the response to any user feedback has almost always been “Here is the decision we’ve made. We don’t really care at all what what you think. Accept it and get over it”.
Why would I think this one would be any different.
I was shown (after a huge and severe backlash by not just me) that I was wrong and sometimes these decisions can be walked back. I was pleasantly surprised by that and I had no problem saying so.
I don’t expect every decision to be vetted thru the user base. Of course that would be unreasonable.
But where these types of big decision are made in the direction that the project is going that potentially affects literally thousands of users then, yeah, I don’t think it’s too much to ask “hey, what do you users think?” and try to at least get some feel for where the users would like to see things go. Not everyone will be happy but at least we can at least build some sort of consensus and people will feel that they are being heard and that their opinion matters.
Despite all the negative remarks in this thread (which I partially share) I wish to thank Paulus and Pascal for their work! I enjoy running the supervised Docker Homeassistant in Ubuntu now for about a year and a half and truly enjoy it!
I would agree and think they would be fine hearing frustration, talking alternatives, engaging, but so many here, not saying you, have been so mean, and talking about how bad they were to do this, death of the project, entitlement attitude, etc… I’ve read the entire thread and I’m summarizing, but lots, not all, posts would have really frustrated me if I was them.
Just makes me sad is all. I get being mad and not wanting to change, I’ve been there. But I used to code a lot and contribute, now I manage a lot of developers, and the #1 that makes them all stop their open source side projects is entitlement and attitude from their own community, which starts out so appreciative, and over time can turn so unappreciative. A year or lots of these threads eventually make people just walk away and say none of this is worth it.
Not saying everyone here did that, but many did.
I guess everyone keep complaining and have them stop the project and then we all just start over with Wink or something
Thank you very much for reconsidering this. I’ve been running on this method for a very long time now, and have had zero issues. Also, thank you Pascal and Paulus for all your hard work!
Just to add to the chorus of thanks, I appreciate you considering the feedback of the community.
One silver lining is that this has made me re-examine my preferred HA installation method (generic Linux) and has helped me understand a bit more about what goes into it. I didn’t fully grasp the complexities that it imposed on the devs, so it’s certainly made me more sympathetic to the motivation behind the proposed change.
I understand that this is a labor of love for you, Pascal, and so many others, and I truly appreciate all of you and your work. Even if the deprecation decision ends up being the eventual path, I thank you for your openness to considering the community’s feedback.
Intelligent guess, I’ve run or helped run 4 tech companies and run one now, so I have a good guess on what it takes to keep a team of engineers happy, working in a market that’s hard for retention, overhead costs, cloud costs, and I can speculate on the user base size that is paying based on previous companies with these models, salaries, the $5 a month cancel anytime model, no guarantees of cash flow past 4 weeks, and pretty much no ability to raise money with a project like this unless it was turned into a hardware coupled solution with a support model everyone would hate worse…
I think what will help is for there to be more transparency as to what the moving parts are, and how doing things to the underlying OS might impact those. I see French mentions dbus - I am not going to pretend I understand that and what it does, but documenting features that may well be interfered with by changes at the OS level may well help.
There are typically only a few topics that this kind of a response. And almost every one of those topics are based on a fundamental change to the way HA operates, yaml config is the most recent example before this one and, TBH, being right on the heels of that one this was truly poor marketing/optics What did they expect so soon after that?
Ironically most of the complaints I see on the forums is from too much development work being done too quickly and causing lots of breaking changes. People are saying “please slow down with the development it’s hard to keep up”. The response from the devs has typically been “breaking changes are part of this. We are still in beta. If you don’t like it that’s tough.”
Now we hear that the pace of development/maintenance of existing features is taking it’s toll on the devs. Hmm…
But instead of just cutting back on the pace of development they decide to start scrapping a ton of the functionality that the user base actually use because it’s “too hard to maintain”. Talk about “can’t see the forest for the trees”.
A good solution for me would be a minimal supervisor. Something that only deploys HA Core and offers the option to backup/restore and upgrade. I could see this been paramount in the future when automatic upgrades are possible.
I feel that add-ons require a far more standardised underlying configuration which Hass OS does nicely. If you’re managing the Docker environment there are many options for deploying addons such as Mosquitto.
With the decision being on hold, you are safe !
Otherwise, you would have had to do something. Not urgently… But at some moment. Now, you just wait for further details. And enjoy what you have
It means you are running Home Assistant Supervised on Raspbian (not HassOS) so, yes, you are affected. However, Paulus has suspended the deprecation until further notice so you don’t need to change anything at the moment.
As soon as they slow down then people will be mad about that. The next big one coming is moving z-wave out of core and into mqtt and using openzwave daemon. That one I know will affect me huge, could make me spend multiple nights and weekends fixing what works perfectly right now. Only benefit is faster restarts and updated device XML files, which I can override anyway.
But, as frustrated as I’ll be, I’ll come here to ask for help, not complain once, and I 100% agree architecture wise with decoupling these things…
I’m sure that will turn into one of these too…
Just part of using a beta free product. I knew what I was trading for when I left SmartThings, constant change for functionality over any form of stability.
I see. I’m going to have to dig into the install scripts then to see what’s going on.
It may be time to simplify the supervisor, I’m not sure why it needs to control anything outside of the Docker Daemon, So that people don’t need to know the device name of their USB devices? I donno.
Please help me understand of this is going to affect me. I have stock Raspbian, with HA Core & supervisor all in docker containers, installed with the one-liner. I don’t use docker-compose or run anything at all manually. The supervisor controls all of it and the add-ons flawlessly, for a year now. I update everything and nothing has ever broken because it’s all in the docker containers maintained by HA. Am I going to be affected? I hope they are talking about supervised HA not running in docker?
Ive never had a single hardware issue or add-on issue. I use both zwave and zigbee USB sticks. I use cli commands, etc.
It is not the installation script itself. I had a look. It is fairly simple. It is the “supervisor” program/container itself. Frenk explained that it uses dbus… and that is tricky part.
What did they expect so soon after that?
