Hello,
I am also interested in this feature, whether through mDNS certificates or by introducing custom headers to enable compatibility with Cloudflare tunnels.
After reviewing the comments in the related PRs, it has become evident that the responses from the developers are not being provided from the perspective of Home Assistant developers, but rather as representatives and owners of Nabu Casa.
1. Lack of Open Discussion
It is clear that the developers aim to restrict discussions regarding features that potentially conflict with Nabu Casa’s business model. For instance, the unilateral decision to close all related topics without providing an explanation, and merely redirecting users to this forum, is a clear method of limiting discourse. How many users who have already been blocked on GitHub do you truly expect to come to this thread and express their interest or feedback?
While some comments may have crossed the line, the core argument presented in those discussions remains valid. Do you believe that users who have been censored will return here to engage in further discussion?
2. Complexity
If complexity is indeed the justification, this argument could benefit from further elaboration. Why exactly is the implementation of mDNS considered complex? And in the case of custom headers, why is it challenging if the solution merely involves passing the headers forward without the need for interpretation?
By not expanding on these points, it gives the impression that this complexity is being used as a generic excuse, hoping that those without technical expertise will believe that it’s as complicated as stated. After reviewing the PRs, even with limited knowledge in iOS development, the code did not appear overly complex to me.
3. Maintenance Burden
As mentioned before, this argument could also be expanded. The code for these features has already been developed by third parties, given that the team has chosen not to allocate time to it (which is within their right). How, specifically, will this feature impact the maintenance of the app? Updates? Framework changes? Concrete examples would help clarify this concern.
Moreover, as this feature is of significant interest to the community, there are multiple ways to mitigate the maintenance burden. While I haven’t fully explored all potential solutions, one straightforward suggestion could be to request a minimum of three (an odd number) technically qualified community developers to act as contributors for this specific feature and maintain it long-term. With three individuals involved, there would be sufficient capacity to manage the feature, make decisions, and ensure continuity in case one contributor steps down.
The best part? If they fail over time, you will have validation for your argument, and this discussion can be put to rest, serving as a precedent for future cases.
4. Conflict of Interest
Lastly, the separation of Nabu Casa from Home Assistant was meant to prevent conflicts of interest, correct? However, despite official denials, the current situation strongly suggests otherwise, as discussions are being closed and blocked unilaterally.
In an open-source project, I believe the community should have a stronger voice in advocating for features that are important to them, even if the core team is against their implementation. If a significant number of users—potentially millions—need a particular feature, should it be disregarded simply because an individual or a small group of founders disagrees? This does not seem fair or aligned with the ethos of open-source development.
I hope you take this critique as constructive and reconsider the current approach.
