spacemanspiff2007

Thanks for thinking about the HABApp users. Currently we do not use the thing inbox, only the available things. So we would be unaffected by these changes.

This sounds like a reasonable enhancement. What about use cases where the unit is determined by a 3rd party system. E.g. I have a thing that connects to a webpage....

I agree with @rkoshak . Why should a binding author dictate e.g. how my items are persisted. Implicitly applying units from the binding obfuscates how the UoM logic works. Just...

> * Should different things be configured in one file (e.g. items and things) or would be prefer to have different files? It would be nice to be able to...

> I believe, with my limited knowledge that would require changes to generic openHAB core stuff far above and beyond just adding a new model listener. Yes - it's more...

> I am going to add this check. Awesome! 🚀 🚀 🚀 > In case you remove an item from a file and then add it in another file (so...

> It is now implemented for objects in the same file. I kept the code simple and the warning log only mentions that "X elements elements with same ids". What...

> it means introducing logic to detect when the metadata is being shown and going down a different path than the standard path used everywhere else in MainUI. No -...

> Such file containing objects with same ids is considered as invalid and all the file is ignored. > Adding this check was only 3 lines of code. I can...

> And that code calls a generic library to convert the JSON to YAML. That'd no longer a generic call. That call will still be generic. The steps would be:...