meshtastic
[Feature Request]: Create Configuration Option for Nodes Displayed on Device's Display
Platform
NRF52, ESP32
Description
Can we make displaying the nodes on the network on the device's display configurable? There may be times you do not want that information displayed for security or other concerns. At times it's also a bit of a hinderance if you have multiple nodes displayed on the screen that you have to cycle through to the information pages. Adding an option to turn this feature on/off would be great.
It would be nice, to be able to delete the messages from a node, from the cli or app, not just deleting on the app. Deleting the message on the app, does not delete the message on the node. reset_nodedb does not delete a message, only the known nodes, plus thats a little too drastic. removing all power from the node doesnt remove the msg either. If the node is in standalone/wifi mode, keeping the message on the display, just seems like it would consume memory space,etc.
It would be nice, to be able to delete the messages from a node, from the cli or app, not just deleting on the app. Deleting the message on the app, does not delete the message on the node. reset_nodedb does not delete a message, only the known nodes, plus thats a little too drastic. removing all power from the node doesnt remove the msg either. If the node is in standalone/wifi mode, keeping the message on the display, just seems like it would consume memory space,etc.
Please open this as separate request. It's less likely to get lost that way :)
It would be nice, to be able to delete the messages from a node, from the cli or app, not just deleting on the app. Deleting the message on the app, does not delete the message on the node. reset_nodedb does not delete a message, only the known nodes, plus thats a little too drastic. removing all power from the node doesnt remove the msg either. If the node is in standalone/wifi mode, keeping the message on the display, just seems like it would consume memory space,etc.
Please open this as separate request. It's less likely to get lost that way :)
I actually have a separate request opened for this already too. #2427
