So if you know what you are doing and know you are going beyond the supported paths, some things may be different. This will be one of them.
I get the suggestion, but it lacks information, like links to the actual specification that allows one to figure out what is wrong.
Personally, I agree on the way it was build and visualized. If I would have build it, it would be a big red bar across the top of this page.
I work in InfoSec - believe me I get the desire to beat people over the head sometimes. However, what’s the number one rule of HA from Paulus? Something along the lines of not being a dick? This just feels kinda dickish.
I’m a relatively new user with Home Assistant at a little over a year of full-time use, but decades of experience in amateur and professional home automation; just trying to help when and where I can. I’ll still maintain that it’s bad UX, but will find a way to live with it.
I still love you though Frenck, and watch all your youtube videos. 
Terry
LOL, well, I’m just really bad at UI 
1 Like
Is it collected by the updater integration?
The updater integration will also collect basic information about the running Home Assistant instance and its environment. The information includes the current Home Assistant version, the time zone, Python version and operating system information. No identifiable information (i.e., IP address, GPS coordinates, etc.) will ever be collected.
Because that’s the general impression I and others had back in May when 0.110 was modified to report the installation method … and allegedly include it in the information reported by updater.
The belief was that it would provide insight into how many users run the Supervised version (and justify the request to rescind its deprecation).
- If the installation method is not being collected, that’s contrary to the general impression since 0.110.
- If it is being collected but not analyzed, that’s disappointing to learn about four versions later.
What is the difference between the information collected and reported by updater and the new “Share Diagnostics”?
I added that to the information screen, so people can actually see what they run. And if people don’t know, we can point them to that location as well. That was the only reason for my modification of that part.
The share diagnostics is a function specific to the Supervisor end. It shares Supervisor crash reports when enabled. Those crash reports can be used to fix issues with the Supervisor. Up until now, the sharing has to lead to (guess) around 10 fixes already. So that is awesome.
1 Like
So it’s not being collected by updater which is contrary to the impression many people had in this thread as far back as May. Disappointing news but clarifies the current situation.
I dunno, could be? As said, that wasn’t part of my goal, nor is the data used at this point.
Who does know?
You? You can check what the updater sends, as documented. However, that doesn’t change the fact that de data isn’t used. I don’t even know if I would need to change something in the backend to store those new values? Honestly, I don’t even know where that backend is or how the database is stored.
As said, my concern was providing insight to which installation method one has, as that was unclear to a lot of people.
I am not a developer; I am no programmer; I am simply a user of many opensource projects. Now that may be a distribution of Linux? An open source DB? Or a whole ecosystem To me if I like what I see I go with the flow. If that flow changes then I either cast my own drift or I adapt my teachings to include the skills required to adapt to the changes!
Point to note here is I am one of those rare individuals who records all traffic entering or leaving my network. This of course can seem anal; but by doing so I know from and where to my personal information goes.
Because the world of IT is so complex I just go with the flow. Chiming in where my skill set requires or dictates.
If it takes another path based upon the developers choices I will evaluate and adapt if need be. If I do not actively contribute to the development then I say nothing!
My opinion and not that of this project! Just saying is all!
I’ve already looked at it and can’t figure it out. You were the last person to modify its code 4 days ago so you’re in a good position to answer the question in a jiffy.
1 Like
I’m not interested in figuring that out.
As far as I can tell, info_object gets reported (see lines 138 & 139). This includes “distribution” and “os_version” (as defined in lines 129 & 130).
1 Like
Are referring to me?
I got multiple offered, I was not specifically referring to you.
Well the offer I made on 27th May still stands. I’m happy to help.
I’m sure you have seen the 4 community guides I created, and the considerable amount of time and effort I put into creating them, so if the Debian guide can be adapted to make it fully compliant, you know how to get hold of me.
1 Like
I’m actually working on replacing the installer as we speak, so things are changing in a matter of weeks (by the looks of it right now).
What does this mean?