[comfoconnect] Add capabilities to existing binding or create a new one?

Development
1

Hi all,

I want to give something back to the community by starting binding development. My current WIP project/idea is an integration of Zehnder’s ComfoConnect LAN gateway to openHAB.

openHAB already has a binding for older models using serial connection. I am not sure if newer models using LAN gateway have the same capabilities (I’ll do a complete rewrite of this python library).

Before I even start, I have a general question: Should I

  1. Try to integrate my code to the existing binding (similar to the ModBus binding) and check which capabilities exists in both connections or
  2. Create a seperate binding just for the LAN gateway(s)?

Thanks in advance!

2

From an end user’s perspective, having just the one ComfoConnect add-on would be less confusing, at least at first. However, complexity to develop and maintain the add-on needs to be taken into consideration as well.

I think the answer is going to be how much code from the original add-on be useful in development of this new capability. If it’s very little because of how the two work is so different, that’s a good sign it maybe should be two separate add-ons. If it’s a lot that’s a good sign that the two should be in one add-on.

I don’t think you’ll find a hard and fast answer to this one. It’s going to depend on specifics.

3

Hi Rich,
thank you for the super fast reply! I absolutly can see your point and just wanted to be sure that there is no “rule” of how to (not) do it :grinning:. I’ll have a look into the existing code and decide then.
Sascha

4

Hi Sascha, great that you are about to bring ComfoConnect native support to openHAB. As the maintainer of the existing ComfoAir binding, I’d just like to add my insight here.

The current binding is actually prepared to be extended by additional “connectors” besides serial (separation of connector and data handling), if they use the same protocol. However, while I’d find it great, if all ComfoAir systems would be gathered under a single binding, I’m not sure if it is reasonable. It seems - and I’d be happy to be proven wrong here - that ComfoConnect uses a completely different protocol. Therefore, I’m not sure how much of the existing code can actually be reused and if it doesn’t somehow hinder/limit comfoconnect part. In the end it would probably just be two bindings in one bundle…

However, it’d be great if you find a reasonable way to achieve this and I’m happy to support you where I can.

BR Hans

5

This topic was automatically closed 41 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.