Thanks, @neonturbo - I think I may have confused you.
I'm not asking for post about when the fix will be ready. What they should post is:
Hope that makes more sense.
They need their next update to work or you will be even more dismissive. Give it a chance to get tested. They only shipped C7 last week..
I am a huge fan too. And I don't like to see people frustrated. That is never a good thing for a company.
I want to upgrade to a C7 but I am going to wait, like I would with any brand new thing, to do so. This is no different than the "don't buy the first model year car" theory.
I am sure this will get ironed out soon, they have a lot riding on this being successful. I hope everyone can be patient, and I personally would wait until they release the next bugfix update or next release update before trying again.
Yes, last thing anyone wants/needs is a rushed-out fix that isn't a fix. (The horror...)
Absolutely what I'm doing. I'm not doing any migration work until there is a fix that has been verified to work. Until then only light playing around w/my C7.
That doesn't mean I'm not frustrated like other new owners. One positive that should come out of this is HE determining why they had this escapee, and updating/adjusting their test plans/processes, etc., to avoid things like this in the future. At my company these events were equally painful, but if you did the right investigations afterwards you could make some important improvements to your processes and provide better customer experiences in the future.
I kinda feel this way about the updates. I know I have seen many updates come out with 2.2.1.119 then .120 then .122 then 125 all within the first two weeks.. so I usually give it a good 14 days to update.
Unless there is a specific feature of fix I REALLY need I try to wait a week or so after a new release.
I know I do...but I am the ultra paranoid privacy/security guy....I don’t even keep my hub connected to the internet unless I am ready to update
I talk a good game, but a lot of the time that update twitch hits me and soon it's too late to stop. 
LOL, I sure don't take my own advice with updates. I have my finger hovering over the update button at all times.
When you have to log into your firewall and disable a rule then log into the hub and update and then re-enable the rule...I usually follow the announcement threads before I take the time to update.
Maybe after all, it's not such a bad thing that my new C7 is still stuck in customs somewhere.
I tend to get frustrated easily...
Probably. I got everything paired in the end on mine, but it was not pain free.
I imagine it will be much easier when a proper fix is released.
No option to do this. Hopefully this is what they are looking into doing.
I agree. I think HEs should have put something out about this to stop many like me poking about trying to get things to work and getting frustrated.
I can only go by memory, since all my devices that have S2 are installed on my production system. I have more on the way, but I was informed of a delay in my latest order.
From memory, when I began joining an Inovelli Red Dimmer, I got the S2 popup with it's set of 3 S2 options and 1 S0 option. I deselected them all and completed the Join that way. It did complete, and I was able to use the Dimmer 'normally'. The popup was new to me, new to all of us, but I did assume that selecting none would be an insecure join. I did not check. It could have ignored my selections and joined S0 because I had it in my head that nothing selected meant nothing selected 
I don't have my C-7 in production. In fact, I have nothing Joined to it, but I have had. I've had a Linear Garage Door Opener (same as the GoControl and Iris branded ones) as well as two Yale locks. All three of those require S0 and don't support S2. They worked fine, but they don't display the popup.
I changed my mind about how I am going to use the C-7 and thus have removed everything in preparation to use it the 'new way'. 
And those devices are on order, but delayed.
You can uncheck any boxes for devices that support S2
Is the question really:
If a device does not have separate pairing methods for unsecure and S0, how does one still pair it unsecure now there there is no end user option to force things to pair unsecured like there was on the C-4/C-5?
Or did I miss interpret the root question?
Previously it was locks/garage door controllers only, or everything secure. There was never an option to force devices that wanted to pair securely, not to.
Just curious how many of these exist besides old(ish) locks and garage door openers? Any other S0-only devices I have do have separate methods, though I don't exactly have an extensive collection of old Z-Wave devices. (But enough that I just assumed this was part of what the standard required.) I asked this once in another thread where a poster was complaining about a specific device but never got an actual answer as to which device it was.
Don't know .. I know I don't have any. I was assuming (?) That was the issue/question on the fibaro device pairing. But maybe I got it wrong?
Download the Hubitat app
