I've read previously about the difference between Pausing and Stopping a Rule Machine instance. However what is different between opening the RM instance then clicking 'Stop' versus simply checking the box in the disable apps column? Obviously it's quicker to just tick the disable box than it is to open the rule, click stop, then click back out. It's also visually clearer at a glance in the rule list when disabled, as the title being struck through is more obvious than the red text (paused, stopped, required expression false)
I'm re writing/consolidating a few rules and it's quicker to not go into the (possibly) redundant rule to stop it, when I'm creating a new rule that will overlap the old one. I can see that to view a disabled rule it has to be first re-enabled; however the redundant, disabled app can still be removed without re-enabling it by using the gear wheel icon and clicking 'remove this child instance'
I just want to make sure there's nothing else I need to be aware of. TIA
No unfortunately that doesn't cover (or even mention) 'Disable'. The 'Hubitat Documentation' does refer to the Disable button in the Apps section; however that's not specific to RM so doesn't cover:
'What's the difference between Stopping or Disabling an RM instance'
It does seem to be a separate thing to stopping or pausing a rule, doing either of those do not reflect on the apps page... And disabling rule presents a different screen when opening the rule, prompting you to re-enable the rule.....
And maybe a tip to @bertabcd1234 , and likely other employees responsible for the documentation, include B in the list for the Apps page in the main list, with a simple link / reference to the Disable Apps notes below....
@johnwill1 - This may be more relevant, in conjunction with the links I posted earlier... Though it probably doesn't answer your question directly, so is likely the spot to capture the answer to your question.
No, that's what I was looking at before posting (which is the first time I ever took the time to search for the answer in the docs before asking ). Nowhere can I find why I shouldn't just tick disable next to my specific rule rather than entering the rule instance, clicking stop, exiting the rule instance.
For a rule, they'd pretty much end up being the same, but one difference is that "disable" is a platform-level feature available to all apps. It stop any app code from running. "Stop" is an RM-specific feature that removes all trigger event subscriptions or scheduled jobs, etc., which also effectively stops the rule from running. The outcome would basically be the same: the app (rule) will never wake or, therefore, do anything. The existence of both partly owes to history: "Stop" has always (or at least long) been an RM feature. Disabling is a relatively newer platform feature, and while the original intent was mostly troubleshooting, some also just use it as a ways to stop some automation, which also works.
The biggest practical difference is that "Disable" prevents all of the app code from running so you can't even open the rule (or any app) to see what it was. You'll just get a message saying it was disabled. "Stop" will let you do so. That and the fact that the rule will know it's stopped, so you'll see "(Stopped)" or whatever that is appended to the end of the app name, whereas disabling doesn't let the app itself even know.
But basically, it sounds like both will do what you're looking for, so whatever is easiest.
I guess to be fair it is likely the first question.... but feels like things that belong together, if only a link from within the RM documentation to the more general notes on disabling an app, with any clarification of the differences between the options.
). Nowhere can I find why I shouldn't just tick disable next to my specific rule rather than entering the rule instance, clicking stop, exiting the rule instance.
I'm not sure a head-to-head comparison wouldn't be overkill but if anyone really thinks so...
