netmindz

I'll try and take a look over in the next few days. Please can you write a quick summary of what you were trying to do so I'm not having...

I'm happy with the basic principle of the change, a single method with "fallback" of simulation where there is no data, I don't have an objections of such a method...

I don't feel it really helps improve the code readability and if it's not performance related then it's just decreasing code quality by blending expected operations with graceful fallback

@coderabbitai review

Hi @blazoncek are you ok to approve this PR or if not can you clarify what changes are required before you feel ok approving?

Where have we got to with this folks? I'm keen to push forward with V4 and get preview/beta release of 0.16 out soon

> I able to compile esp32_eth and esp32_eth_V4 versions. But what I can do with: > > ``` > WESP32_RTL8201 > ``` > > How I can have this option...

Can we please get this over the line please. Do you have permission to just push the changes you want @blazoncek ?

It's rather unusual for a dmx fixture to change it's whole personality based on a dmx value, that's what RDM is for. If we were to make this change then...

Was there a PR or just commit straight to main @blazoncek ? Can we update with reference then close if completed?