Today the setting data is linked to the « virtual » device so if a second thermostat is created in another dashboard or by another person the data are synchronized.
As discussed, making it an integration could be simpler for displaying all settings, adding thermostats, creating schedules and sharing with all family members.
Anyway, @Will_71, I really like what you’re building there.
And I’m responding to your discussions about a full integration, like for energy monitoring: that would be great, but I think that an initial integration of your control widget, without having thought everything through yet, would allow us to get ‹ field › feedback with a first version, and then consider how to go further.
Ok, as @StephaneB suggests, that could be a good way to validate the direction it’s taking. However, I think configuring the thermostat directly in the dashboard configuration is likely to cause problems.
In the user’s mental model, the dashboard configuration is purely cosmetic: it serves to represent Gladys, not to define her behavior.
If multiple users configure different dashboards with different thermostats, it becomes difficult to understand the expected behavior:
will there be multiple conflicting thermostats?
will changing user A’s dashboard affect user B’s?
Similarly, asking users to go through the MQTT integration to use the thermostat seems complex to me . The MQTT integration is currently the only Gladys integration aimed at a truly « tech » audience, while the thermostat feature is clearly a feature for the general public.
I think it would be preferable to move this configuration into a dedicated « Thermostat » integration, which would handle everything: automatic creation of the device, operating modes, and eventually scheduling, etc.
And following on that, it seemed to me that this is exactly what you were criticizing about the Home Assistant (HA) system @Will_71 (which I also agree with). So precisely, if Gladys manages this creation of a « virtual » device itself, like with the Energy Monitoring integration, Gladys will do better than HA and keep its commitment to simplicity for the user!!
We could take the opportunity, without urgency, to standardize this page, right? I find that the mix of logos/photos/2D/3D isn’t the most aesthetically pleasing…
I’m starting to dream: a small touchscreen with only the thermostat integration in each of my bedrooms. That way, I wouldn’t need the Aqara W100 anymore.
Maybe we should add « Generic » next to « Thermostat », since the image could suggest that it’s meant for a specific type of thermostat. And why not add a small Gladys logo on the thermostat?
Thermostat settings page (I still have adjustments to make here):
The thermostat device is created automatically without needing to create a virtual MQTT device or anything else. @Terdious you’re going to be pleased
Schedules management page:
Here it’s possible to create new schedules, delete them, duplicate them, or edit them. I plan to add a search and sort bar (A-Z)
In schedule mode it’s possible to force a manual mode for a period of time (currently defined in the settings). I might add this time setting to the dashboard — it’s more convenient to be able to choose it at the moment you change the temperature manually.
Instead of « Thermostat feature (setpoint) » I would put « Choice of the thermostat (created in the thermostat integration) » as you indicated above the image — I find that clearer.
. The MQTT integration is currently the only Gladys integration aimed at a truly « tech » audience, while the thermostat feature is clearly a feature for the general public.
