It feels like this may be straying from the topic of Coco-Hue. I know @bertabcd1234 has been quite open to discussing these topics previously, and would ultimately leave it up to him, but it feels unfair to have a lengthy discussion about something that is at a higher level than the integration itself..... IMO
2 Likes
Thanks @bobbyD
1 Like
There is only one flagged post that I am referring to. Revising the content, would remove the flag and unhide the post, by the way.
2 Likes
I think at this point if you're worried about your hue integration changing for any reason it would be best then to switch to the built in Hue integration... This way you don't have to worry about someone who is providing app developement free of charge when they actually have a regular job from making a change you don't like.
As to code on github should only be discussed on github seems silly in the extreme...
3 Likes
I have deleted all of my posts in this thread. I’m not interested in engaging further.
To be fair, not all HE updates are met with praise and fan-fare either.... (no offense guys). Plus the built-in integration doesn't currently support the accessories and scenes like Coco-Hue and the Advanced Hue Bridge integration do.... 
I know you are critiquing the idea, but still feels a little harsh to call an idea "silly". I agree with you that code can be discussed across multiple forums, for different reasons.
2 Likes
That's a shame. I did actually agree with some of the points you raised.... Or at least my own variations....
Sure and you can roll back as well. The difference there is the HE devs are paid. Community dev's aren't. Nor are they obligated to do even do updates. My point is threads like this make it seem as if the end user has some kind of entitlement vs just being appreciative of the work a community dev has done. It tends to raise my hackles a bit.
2 Likes
The reason people use 3rd party Hue integrations is because Hubitat's is frozen in about 2018 and has never implemented scenes. It does seem less than optimal for a major IOT integration to require 3rd party drivers, even if excellent, for basic (to Hue) functionality.
4 Likes
Sure, of course that's why people switch (I myself use cocohue and several other community drivers/apps because they're better). I don't kvetch though when changes are made to advance the app/drivers I use. I can either stay where I am or install the update. In the end I just appreciate the work the dev has done and don't feel entitled to tell them how to run THEIR code... That's all I'm saying. Everyone has a choice. Don't like something? Use something else... That's the beauty of it!
I will repost them on GitHub along with a fork of the cocohue code at 4.2.0.
Bummer.
I searched but couldn’t find that post in which you actually thanked the developer of this open source project for their hard work.
Just the reference to that being a thankless task, which this whole digression is an example of, mostly because of how you chose to engage with the developer, IMO.
2 Likes
I am one of those "stuck" in 2018, as I never needed anything more than the built-in integration for all my automation needs, and I have nearly 150 Hue devices.
The beauty of this community is that Hubitat empowers users seeking more advanced features, that go beyond the built in drivers and apps, to adopt other users' efforts in providing the additional support.
With that being said, be on the look out for the next major release. It might surprise you... 
10 Likes
Another hint that 2.4 is going to be a biggie -- looking forward to it!
5 Likes
...an extra heaping helping of HE... 
1 Like
Some clarification:
- There is no "the maintainers." It is literally just me.
- As I mention in the readme, I prefer the Hubitat Community for discussion (rather than GitHub). No matter where it is posted, however, you're more likely to have better experience if you recognize the above.
But here is certainly a fine place to (respectfully) discuss.
Going back to the actual discussion, I haven't seen anyone share any feelings about this question, so I can repeat it here in case it got lost:
- Would anyone see any value in adding "on" and "off" commands back to the scene driver as effectively momentary-only commands?
- That is, one where "on" will activate the scene and "off" will basically do nothing.
- "On" would do the same as
push(1), which I'd still recommend -- while recognizing that Alexa and other integrations might work better with switches
- "On" would do the same as
- The "switch" state on the device will turn on when activated for a few seconds, the automatically set itself to off (this is what I mean with "momentary"), possibly with some option to configure this. This means the "switch" state would normally be off and not a reliable indicator of the current scene activation status, which it likely never was before since Hue does not internally track this (and is part of the reason this all came up in the first place).
- That is, one where "on" will activate the scene and "off" will basically do nothing.
Thanks!
4 Likes
My HE is setup for total "automation", very few of my rules rely on any "user" input and those that do are easily configured using RL and RM rules using lutron picos or the "activators". As such I have zero need for the "switch" function.
Keep up the great work it's VERY appreciated and as you said, if the changes in the latest versions don't suit your needs, stay on previous version.
2 Likes
I guess part of the question is whether full "backwards compatibility" is necessary and if this change might still be confusing, since despite the capability being there, it would not (necessarily; depending on your old settings) work the same as before but rather only as described above.
These were my thoughts on re-introducing the switch capability:
I personally would be happy to see it re-introduced, including the momentary feature.
2 Likes
There's no "including" -- that's the entirety of the change. 
But in any case, version 5.1.2 has introduced this feature. I assume it will address most use cases that previously relied on switch behavior (e.g., Alexa integration ... or even just the ease of clicking a single button on the device detail page without needing to provide any parameters).
This kind of feedback is helpful and appreciated, so thanks!
As usual, more details are in the main topic for this integration.
7 Likes
