Many years ago, I worked on an open source project. Took time out to spend quite a few hours with one potential user demonstrating the package. He asked for a couple of customisations, and got most upset when asked how much he was willing to pay… “But it is free software, you do this for fun” was his cry.
If I have to take time out of earning a living, it is not unreasonable to expect to be paid for the work.
There’s nothing actionable in the first post. The author even begins with the caveat “more of a rant”. Replace Jinja2 with what exactly? It’s unclear what would placate the rant’s author (other than not Jinja2).
The recent suggestion to add Lua (because they “hate jinja with a passion”) at least indicates what should be added.
petro’s reply was succinct and factual. I detected no condescension, just an explanation that it’s possible and someone will need to submit a PR. As he pointed out, that’s how pyscript was added (i.e. someone volunteered their time to create it and submit it as a PR). He’s familiar with the process, having submitted many PRs.
Regarding your bullet points:
-
Some things are in fact impossible. Not just because the idea may be highly disruptive but because some ideas don’t fit with the founder’s vision for the product (Paulus has final say in these matters).
-
Based on my 5+ years of helping thousands of people in this forum, a significant number of reported questions/problems are answered/solved in the documentation. I’m led to conclude they simply didn’t read the documentation, especially when it contains an apt example. So, yeah, often the docs are fine (not perfect, but serviceable) just not read. Where the docs need improvement, everyone is free to enhance them and they do.
-
There are a few users who expect answers/solutions with little investment of their time effort; they want others to do all the work. 'nuf said.
-
Undeniably there are some concepts that are challenging to comprehend and not only require reading the documentation but also perusing the forum for examples (and/or watching video tutorials). If there’s a way to make people learn them with less effort then suggestions are welcome. However, there are also some concepts that are in fact simple but do require some reading. The UI has limitations on just how much it can convey concepts (especially if the concept uses unfamiliar terminology).
-
Many people do in fact “do it” themselves by creating custom cards, integrations, blueprints, etc and share them with others. If one doesn’t have the requisite software development skills then they’ll need to make a compelling case for their idea and hope someone implements it for them (or someone shows them an existing alternative).
1 Like
I’m sorry? Where is there any condescension in any of my posts? I’m just explaining what can be done…
3 Likes
I share the same frustration as an occasional user of HA.
Rhetorical question:
Why don’t simply use python or provide it as a supported option to write automatons?
You can with python_scripts and pyscript.
1 Like