Jan-Philipp Benecke
Jan-Philipp Benecke
Yea as far as i understood, this only works when the user, mentioned in CODEOWNERS, also has write access to the repository. I may missunderstood this also.
We get our data from https://www.radio-browser.info. It seems that the stream URL there is broken (https://www.radio-browser.info/history/5144d2ce-a0b6-4320-afb9-3e090044acdd) and therefore the station does not appear in the media browser.
Well, the integration has a nearly 100% test coverage which we would break without a test. So I would encourage you to add one.
I hope you don't mind me fixing the test for you, that would have been too much for comments I think. So feel free to have a look and apply...
Thanks 👍
> I think it's not great that we still need to abort the flow if there's already an existing entry. So there's now two ways of saying that the integration...
> Can't we add this to the manifest? Would be possible, yes. Edit: This way, we can use it in the add integration dialog without any problems and we would...
Moved this to the manifest now
> Do we know today which integrations only support a single entry? Yes, you could search the `config_flow.py` for `self.async_abort(reason="single_instance_allowed")` and some have `already_configured`.
Should we mark this as a breaking change as someone may already be using the old sensor in their automations? Or has the sensor not yet been released?