Future of NMBS integration #21
Replies: 2 comments 8 replies
-
Hi, there was open pull request already during the last 6 months from me in the core repository, so there's probably already some duplicated work here being done. It's going through the final stages, has config flows and tests based on the older version of this library. The config flow went through different stages, and on the end it came up that the liveboard feature shouldn't be a separate thing, so the current to be accepted config flow will ask for your connection (departing and arrival) station and setup 3 sensors: the connection and 2 disabled liveboards for departing and arrival station. Looking forward to get to know how it's being used and how we could improve. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
The config flow has been added into the integration. There's still something left that was mentioned in the pull request to be looked into further regarding using vias or not. @jcoetsie, do you have your code somewhere publicly available? Let's look into how much it differs from mine and combine efforts. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hi everyone,
I've already seen some screenshots of work being done on the Home Assistant integration in #5. It might be a good idea to align a bit to avoid duplicating efforts.
If there's anything missing or needed in the pyRail library, feel free to create an issue or even fix it yourself.
For @lgnap and @jcoetsie, just so you're aware: @silamon has been actively working on updating the integration for a while now, with this PR: home-assistant/core#121548. It’s great to see the progress being made, with some reviews from @joostlek along the way.
As most of you know, Home Assistant (and most open source projects) prefers small, incremental changes to make reviews and follow-ups easier.
I’d suggest we wait until the migration to config flow is complete, as this should help minimise future breaking changes.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions