Hello @rpwong ,
…then you should make yourself aware of any previous attempts to merge and reasons that it didn’t happen. I don’t know the history, but the original binding was created long enough ago that I imagine a PR was discussed at some point.
Have definetely done that. I went through the last merge request (That was not completed due to lack of time on the mantainer’s side) and implemented all recommendations before doing the PR
- Merging for 3.4 doesn’t really do much, because developers are now working toward 4.0 and there won’t be a 3.5. So you’d want to aim for 4.0 compatibility in a PR.
The PR is for OH 4.
- The official Broadlink thermostat binding has been expanded to include IR remote functionality, I gather that it’s limited, but there would be redundancy. (I think this is what @matt1 was referring to as “the other binding”)
I have tested this binding. As you mentioned, it added support for Remotes, however, the protocol library hasn’t been maintained for a couple of years. The advantage of this binding is self contained, and it does not depend on other libraries. I tested the current Broadlink thermostat binding and i like it, but it does not work with all my devices. I actually plan to take some of the ideas from that binding, for example, implementing a channel for saving learnt commands automatically
If you submit a PR, you would (in my opinion) be taking on the role of developer/maintainer to ensure that the binding continues to work in the future. It’s great if you plan to do that, but not so much if you were thinking of this as a one-time deal.
I am hoping to be able to help maintain this library, even though i have just gotten back into java. The previous maintainer mentioned he might be able to help too, so yes, i understand that.
Thanks for your feedback!