You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository was archived by the owner on Feb 24, 2021. It is now read-only.
I see the argument against using names for the value classes (localisation, subject to change, etc.). However, it would be great if nodes could still be named. Those arguments do not apply to node names as they are specified manually in the UI.
This would help tremendously with moving/replacing z-wave devices.
Currently the options are /33/112/1/90, requiring downstream consumers to keep track of Node IDs, or /door5/sensor_binary/sensor, where sensor_binary and sensor are not guaranteed to be stable since they come from an external library. If we had a hybrid option like /door5/112/1/90, then consumers do not need to know which node ID to use, but they can still use constant IDs for the value.