Distributing bindings through the IoT Marketplace


(Rohnny Swennen) #81

@p0lar
add “market” (without quotes) to your addons config file under MISC and binding-3338717 to the list of bindings.


(Kai Kreuzer) #82

The limit has been increased to 100, so you should again see all marketplace entries in openHAB.
The “final” solution will have to be to build a paging mechanism first in the marketplace, then in the openHAB client to it - but for now, we should be all fine.


(Kai Kreuzer) #83

Looking at the current entries, I see that many of the recent additions seem to have missed the recommendations for submissions, so please let me repeat them here:

  • Let’s add “Binding” to the label (as we will have other add-on type in future there as well)
  • As it is the Eclipse SmartHome marketplace, do not specifically say “for openHAB 2” - it should in general be compatible with any ESH-based solution.
  • Let’s try to have logos for the listings, so that the appearance is nicer when browsing them

It would be nice if the existing ones would be updated accordingly by their authors - thanks!


(Lolodomo) #84

I just tried to add a new binding in the marketplace. But I can’t find anywhere my contribution. Is it normal that I can’t find it anywhere until it is approved ? Or does it mean that my action was finally not taken into account at all ?
Is there anywhere I can find all my contributions to the marketplace ?


(Kai Kreuzer) #85

I would have expected to see my listings under https://marketplace.eclipse.org/user/kkreuzer/listings, but I actuallly don’t, I am not sure why not. But as I am subscribed to them, I can find them on https://marketplace.eclipse.org/user/kkreuzer/subscriptions/node - please check if the same works for your account.


(druciak) #86

Can somebody tell why I can’t see Z-Wave binding on the list in Paper UI? Is it a problem with my installation, this specific marketplace item or maybe with the marketplace add-on?


(Ssalonen) #87

Did you check this post to enable Alpha addons in Paper UI?

Best,
Sami


(druciak) #88

Thanks, worked. For some reason I was sure the binding is marked as Beta.


(druciak) #89

However the link is broken, it should point to 2.2 version I guess…
@chris could you please look into this?


(Chris Jackson) #90

Try now…


(druciak) #91

Worked, thenks!


(SiHui) #92

Thx, I even didn’t know the security version is available through the market place :sunglasses:


(Pali) #93

I published my concern in other topic about the security of the 3rd party bindings, but as this might be better place, I post it here as well. For me it seems now that direction is more to publish binding in the marketplace than include them to openHAB as code reviews are currently a huge bottle neck. How can we be sure that the bindings published to market place are safe? I think it’s a huge security risk and can cause lot of harm to openHAB in general.

My opinion is that code review process should be revised so that new bindings (not core features) can be merged much more easily. Code not need to be perfect before it can be accepted. When codes are in, they will be improved by initial contributor but also by other community members and even refactored as we have seen many times already.


(Benjamin) #94

I agree. It’s understandable that a certain level of quality is required for a binding to be inserted into the openHAB family.

I also understand, that the eclipse marketplace was the answer for the problem mentioned by Pali. But beside the security problem mentioned, I also see the problem for future maintenance. If the trend continues to publish bindings into the eclipse marketplace, there will be a huge dependence on the original developer. E.g. if a binding stops working because some API calls change, there will never be any fix if the original developer dropped the maintenance.

Has there already been a discussion about creating a seperate area in paperUI for bindings in alpha status (until the code got reviewed and official accepted)? This could encourage developers to open source their work, instead of offering a black box on the marketplace.

I know that this could also lead to laziness and that people just throw in their bindings into the new area. But at least it would open the possibility, that someone wants & can contribute to another ones binding.

The right to exist for the eclipse marketplace is still there. As stated in the Initial post: closed source parts and so on…


(Ganesh) #95

Thats exactly my concern as well. A binary binding that works today shouldn’t break after 6 months. You can’t ask developers and publishers to re-compile every 6 months with new core api.
Here was my proposal:


(Ganesh) #96

Regarding the security and chances of spyware/maliciousware we should have digital signatures. That way, the contributor is liable and traceable in case of serious privacy violations of users.
And also, the foundation or whoever is maintaining app store should have a basic scrutiny of the binary. And the binary should be kept in records forever, in case a legal matter arises. This way, the virus writers/hackers stay away from openhab installations.


(Ganesh) #97

In my case, I am distributing updates/addons through encrypted files. The user can only install updates released from my company. But digital signatures built into app store, is a way to go. Or maybe developers credit card / bank details verification at the time of account creation, will guarantee his origin and authenticity.


(Gaël L'hopital) #98

I just pushed the xPL Binding to the marketplace for those interested in it.


(John Doe) #99

Marketplace does not appear in my AddOns/Misc. How can I install it?


(Hans-Jörg Merk) #100

Activate the marketplace in configuration/system.