Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Unique ID for the sensors #1

Open
Tom-ahawk opened this issue Oct 9, 2024 · 5 comments
Open

Unique ID for the sensors #1

Tom-ahawk opened this issue Oct 9, 2024 · 5 comments

Comments

@Tom-ahawk
Copy link

Tom-ahawk commented Oct 9, 2024

Hi.

I am still enjoying your integration.

HA has now the functionality to create categories and then add this to a sensor. All the sensors that this integration creates are displayed in the Helpers overview.

I am not able to assign a category to the sensors due to this:
“This entity ('sensor.rsp1570_speaker_front_right') does not have a unique ID, therefore its settings cannot be managed from the UI. ”

Is it possible to make the integration giving the sensor a unique ID, so its possible to add a category. Would be so helpful since the integration creates so many sensors.

@pp81381
Copy link
Owner

pp81381 commented Oct 9, 2024

Hi,

Nice to hear from you! I hope that all goes well.

I can take a look at this at the weekend but I just wanted to check that I'm understanding the problem correctly. I'm working from memory here and I may not be remembering properly but I'm not sure that this integration creates any sensors. However, the various media player states can be wrapped by template sensors that would be defined in configuration.yaml. If that is the case then template sensors can have unique ids added in the yaml.

Apologies if I'm talking nonsense - I can have a proper look at the weekend.

@pp81381
Copy link
Owner

pp81381 commented Oct 13, 2024

Hi,

I've taken a look and I assume that you are using the example config, which does use the template sensors mentioned above. I will update the examples to include unique ids and I'll also update them to use the 'modern' yaml format in order to future proof them. Should be a cut/paste exercise to solve your problem.

I'm afraid that I spent most of my time this weekend getting my development environment up to date (HA 2024-10 and Python 3.12 etc.) so I probably won't finish this until next weekend at the earliest. However, when I do release an update I will also take the opportunity to fix the various warnings about the integration using deprecated features.

@Tom-ahawk
Copy link
Author

That’s good news, really appreciated!

@pp81381
Copy link
Owner

pp81381 commented Jan 25, 2025

Hi,

Apologies for the huge delay but I have finally put out a new version of the integration.

The main reason for the release was to get rid of deprecation messages but I have also included a script to help generate sensor definitions. It generates both legacy and modern format template sensor definitions. Both types will have unique_ids in them.

I remember that you had quite a sophisticated configuration that may include a lot of entity ids so I imagine that the simplest thing for you to do would be to use the legacy format. Hopefully the script will generate yaml with the same entity ids as those you already have by default. Please check it carefully before replacing your old configuration. If it doesn't generate exactly what you need then the script can be run with various parameters to tailor the output. If you can't get it to generate back-compatible yaml then let me know and I will try to help.

The modern format doesn't give you as much control over the entity ids and would force you to generate new entities (and then edit all of your other config to use them) so I wouldn't recommend it unless you want to switch to it for some other reason.

Let me know how it goes!

@Tom-ahawk
Copy link
Author

Thanks for the info. I’ll take a look at this during this week.

And thank you again for maintaining this integration !!!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants