Did someone argue that?
Did you see them say that?? I haven't and would bet the answer would be closer to "sure wish we could." But then.. I'm just guessing too. 
Indirectly I would say yes.
The only stance I've seen from your side over the past 6 months is that you can't be expected to support user code.
I haven't seen any comments about upcoming changes, or even a desire to make changes, to make the user code less likely to take down the system.
And again, that's okay. That might not be a problem you need to solve right now, or ever.
1 Like
In our defense, we try not to talk about upcoming changes at all.
3 Likes
Fair enough. And I completely agree with that by the way. It has been shown time and time again that this often backfires on the developers.
On the other hand if it were something imminent, the response is usually something closer to well we'll see what comes in the future release. Or, wait and see....
I can show a number of examples of that in the forum.
At the end of the day this will be binary decision at some point either the developers will get officially support either through certification program or other form or they go elsewhere and with them the users.
Absolutely. We have already included a few well written community code as built in drivers.
1 Like
You might want to check with the other people on the forum before making that statement.
1 Like
Look, in the end I wouldn't really want my drivers included in box anyway... Not that you do either. 
What I want is a segmented enough system that user code doesn't crash the box. or the capability to have a secondary box run all the user code, without the restrictions that hub link affords.
The fact you included some community drivers in the box doesn't change the discussion around interaction between user code and system code.
Where one door closes another opens.
If what you are saying is true, no one should be on other platforms that don't have developer support. It's not binary, its not all or nothing.
It's about being the best choice for home automation, not if a developer is officially certified. Just because you have a piece of paper or a title, doesn't make you good at what you do.
3 Likes
What you mean @chuck.schwer?
Is my opinion that the current model will need to evolve to a state where the community developed code is not requested to be removed. There will be a time where this will need to change if you wish to go mass market.
Just my opinion.
What do I know....
I'm reading this and thinking to myself......
"You guys might just be able to sort out Brexit for us."
Any volunteers cos' we sure need someone to kick some axse!!!!!
EDIT: Sorry. Couldn't help myself after what I have just watched.
11 Likes
I spent 8 hours today in a room with UK officials discussing brexit impacts on cyber security and government response. Brutal.
1 Like
I mean that not everyone will see it as binary. I'm sure there are plenty of people that are happy to use Hubitat without a certified developer program. Heck even @JasonJoelOld who wants us to start one hasn't signed on board yet,, closest he got was "I might consider .., it" Thats like the Simpons qoute "I can't promise I'll try, but I'll try to try"
4 Likes
UK based company or external? Is fun how the conversations change from the perspective you are sitting. Had similar discussions but regarding Human resources, operations and taxation:sweat_smile:
However, again, this comes down to HOW to solve separating user code from system code and on a local system with limited processing resources. That is just not an easy task and it's really an issue that only affects a small portion of us. The "mass market" user isn't going to be running custom code on their hubs. They aren't going to be developing or debugging code on it either. They are going to take what comes out of the box and use it. They might pop into the forums and load a custom app here or there, but the majority of users just don't operate that way.
It's like running a webserver on an ESP8266 and expecting it to handle millions of hits daily. Can someone do that? Sure. Should it be done? Perhaps not.
Currently yes.
But is MY conviction that is not forever...
I had to have the conversation from both sides... as we have facilities that are critically infrastructure in the UK, but on the other side we could also supply the UK externally if they're internal critical infrastructure was non-functional.
1 Like
true. But I would not have bought the hub to begin with if it didn't have that capability... So if they decide that's the only market they are interested in, then myself and a number of others would definitely have to move to a different hub.
But since the capability is there now, that is why I'm giving opinions and feature requests to enhance it and make it better.
If the system stays exactly the way it is, I can probably live with that for quite a while. I've been able to keep my hub stable enough for my needs at this point. If my needs expand in the future requiring a lot more user code, that may or may not be okay.
This topic from funny went boring...
6 Likes
