Why the heck is default_config so difficult to customize?

[Tinkerer (aka DubhAd on GitHub)]

If you can point it out to me I’ll merge them

[allan]

I’m going to guess this one…

Why the heck is default_config so difficult to customize?

As it is if you want to remove a single integration from default_config: (History, Map, logbook, etc), you need to remove default_config: and manually add every other included integration EXCEPT the one you would like to get rid of. The most obvious solution to me would be to add the option to exclude entries from default_config: in the configuration. Example: default_config: exclude: - Map But knowing how default_config works, that’s not really viable. I suggest we go back to the way …

[Tinkerer (aka DubhAd on GitHub)]

Thanks, I’ll merge those

[allan]

Out of interest would it not have been better to leave this in the feature requests section as its now showing 0 votes and closed for the feature request and the WTH event was last year (have not heard about a new one yet, but may have missed the announcement due to being busy). Or are the Devs treating the WTH section as a more important feature request area due to it being peoples frustrations?

[Tinkerer (aka DubhAd on GitHub)]

Hmmm, I hadn’t meant it to lose the votes - I clearly merged them the wrong way around

Nope, checked, votes show at the top

[allan]

hmmm… When I look at the FR below its shows 0 votes and closed. This WTH thread is showing 113 Votes, which is why I asked if it would have been better the other way around leaving the Feature Request as that would be where more people would probably look / vote.

Ability to ignore components in default_config

Hi, just like for ‘discovery:’, it would be nice if ‘default_config:’ would accept ‘ignore:’ so we could ignore components we don’t want to be included. Edit: To make it clearer why I find this would be useful: If you look at this post that is not even a year old, 7 components (like all the ‘helpers’ like input_text, input_boolean, etc) have been added to default_config since then! So with every update, you have to look if something has been added otherwise it could break your installation.

Also shows 0 votes in the list of FRs in the Feature Requests section.

[Tinkerer (aka DubhAd on GitHub)]

The votes were removed from there and added here. If I’d merged them the other way around the same would have happened.

[allan]

I understand regarding the votes. I guess I just expected them to be merged in to the feature request section (as all the votes are technically for the feature request), rather than the WTH section which I assumed would be used less as it was originally for the month of WTH last year.

Although I am feeling a little disheartened right now, after seeing the comment below from one of the moderators, so it probably wont make a difference where the votes ended up

Not that I think it will help. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a feature request get implemented.

[DavidFW1960 (David)]

There have been some… (New templates being implemented into packages recently as an example) and the whole month of what-the-heck saw a bunch of them being implemented last year although those are not technically FR’s.
What I DO find ironic however is that the (now deceased) starter of this thread was one of the devs himself…

[petro]

Feature requests get implemented all the time, moderators have no sway in that unless they dev and add it themselves. People need to stop thinking moderators are anything but moderators. We moderate the forums, that’s it. We aren’t voices for HA.

[Tinkerer (aka DubhAd on GitHub)]

And I have seen them implemented - but like anything else, it’s up to the people developing stuff. People could vote for a tea platform as much as they want, but if nobody steps up to do it, the votes don’t matter.

On the other side, if a few dozen people vote for something and somebody interested sees that, they may pick it up and make it happen.

Ultimately they’re a way of people saying we’d like this and bringing to the attention of devs who’re looking for something to do.

[AleXSR7001 (AleXSR700)]

Also voted as by chance I asked a question that lead me here.

I also believe that it is much more convenient for 90 % of the users to add an ignore line than constantly monitor release notes.

We must not forget that the dev team does an amazing job at constantly improving home assistant and provides multiple new release per month. As much as I’d love to, I simply don’t have time to track everything that is going on and if I miss one new default integration it might break something else.

So I too think that an override/exclude/disable would be great.

[capandcamera (Josh)]

An exclude functionality would be amazing, I do not use the map nor want it included, which means I’m having to ensure I keep all of the ‘default_config’ entries listed manually and updated.

default_config:
    exclude:
        - map

Would be so much easier.

[123 (Taras)]

To all who voted for this Feature Request:

Add exclude option to default_config

[bobkersten (Bob)]

Great news. At least now the addition of new integrations can be automated in my HA setup, in which I’ve removed integrations I don’t want.

[maxym]

And remains waiting for merge, missed two HA releases.

[petro]

This is normal for any PR…

[maxym]

you forgot to add: …in HA development.

Since it’s really awaited feature I really hoped it will be pushed to see a light of day quicker.

[petro]

It’s waiting on a reviewer. This is a normal software process. There was 1000 PRs added in October and 1000+ in November. Quit acting like a know it all armchair developer. The process exists for a reason. Be patient and wait for a review or review it yourself.

[maxym]

I’ve noticed it has changed state from Needs review to Incoming, remaining in the recent one for a month. I didn’t considered it as another state representing waiting for the review.
If it’s waiting for reviewer then obviously there are no reasons to complain.