Add config flow to Hydrawise

[dknowles2]

Breaking change

Hydrawise integration no longer supports configuration by YAML. Existing YAML configurations will be imported automatically and can safely be removed.

Proposed change

Add config flow to Hydrawise.

Type of change

• Dependency upgrade
• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New integration (thank you!)
• New feature (which adds functionality to an existing integration)
• Deprecation (breaking change to happen in the future)
• Breaking change (fix/feature causing existing functionality to break)
• Code quality improvements to existing code or addition of tests

Additional information

• This PR fixes or closes issue: fixes #
• This PR is related to issue:
• Link to documentation pull request: Update Hydrawise for config flow home-assistant.io#28108

Checklist

• The code change is tested and works locally.
• Local tests pass. Your PR cannot be merged unless tests pass
• There is no commented out code in this PR.
• I have followed the development checklist
• I have followed the perfect PR recommendations
• The code has been formatted using Black (black --fast homeassistant tests)
• Tests have been added to verify that the new code works.

If user exposed functionality or configuration variables are added/changed:

• Documentation added/updated for www.home-assistant.io

If the code communicates with devices, web services, or third-party tools:

• The manifest file has all fields filled out correctly.
  Updated and included derived files by running: python3 -m script.hassfest.
• New or updated dependencies have been added to requirements_all.txt.
  Updated by running python3 -m script.gen_requirements_all.
• For the updated dependencies - a link to the changelog, or at minimum a diff between library versions is added to the PR description.
• Untested files have been added to .coveragerc.

To help with the load of incoming pull requests:

• I have reviewed two other open pull requests in this repository.

[home-assistant]

Hey there @ptcryan, mind taking a look at this pull request as it has been labeled with an integration (hydrawise) you are listed as a code owner for? Thanks!

Code owner commands

Code owners of hydrawise can trigger bot actions by commenting:

• @home-assistant close Closes the pull request.
• @home-assistant rename Awesome new title Renames the pull request.
• @home-assistant reopen Reopen the pull request.
• @home-assistant unassign hydrawise Removes the current integration label and assignees on the pull request, add the integration domain after the command.

[smoki3]

Hi,

I think you have to move the termination date for the yaml to 2024.1.

With 2023.7 they say it have to work at least 6 months:

https://github.com/home-assistant/architecture/blob/master/adr/0021-YAML-integration-configuration-deprecation-policy.md

[smoki3]

ping?

[dknowles2]

Hi,

I think you have to move the termination date for the yaml to 2024.1.

With 2023.7 they say it have to work at least 6 months:

https://github.com/home-assistant/architecture/blob/master/adr/0021-YAML-integration-configuration-deprecation-policy.md

6 months is a long time. I wonder if I should go back to my original approach and migrate to the new API at the same time as introducing config flow. The old API seems to be broken for most people at this point (based on user reports), so I'm not sure it's even worth maintaining compatibility. Then we just keep the existing code for the old API with the 6 month deprecation window, and the new code can carry on without having to worry about it.

[gjohansson-ST]

6 months is a long time. I wonder if I should go back to my original approach and migrate to the new API at the same time as introducing config flow. The old API seems to be broken for most people at this point (based on user reports), so I'm not sure it's even worth maintaining compatibility. Then we just keep the existing code for the old API with the 6 month deprecation window, and the new code can carry on without having to worry about it.

Not sure what a new api has anything to do with a config flow?
Perhaps what you mean with an api change makes sense but that should not stop this PR so I hope you continue this one as anyhow for anyone using the integration or want to set it up it's a good thing.

Thanks
G

[dknowles2]

Not sure what a new api has anything to do with a config flow?

The new API uses user/password authentication instead of an API token. So if we do config flow now and then migrate to the new API, users will have two migrations in quick succession.

Making the switch to config flow at the same time as the API change means only a single breaking change. That seems nicer from a user's point of view.

[gjohansson-ST]

Making the switch to config flow at the same time as the API change means only a single breaking change. That seems nicer from a user's point of view.

Nothing breaks with the config flow as we should do an import, we just need to tell people to remove the yaml after the import has been made.

The api change with all it considerations needs to be it's own PR/change anyhow so it would seem easier to me to do the config flow first and second the api change in a separate PR

[dknowles2]

Making the switch to config flow at the same time as the API change means only a single breaking change. That seems nicer from a user's point of view.

Nothing breaks with the config flow as we should do an import, we just need to tell people to remove the yaml after the import has been made.

The api change with all it considerations needs to be it's own PR/change anyhow so it would seem easier to me to do the config flow first and second the api change in a separate PR

Okay, I updated the deprecation dates. We can leave this as-is and I'll do the full API migration separately.

[smoki3]

Ping: Any update needed? as 2023.10 is coming soon.

[dknowles2]

Ping: Any update needed? as 2023.10 is coming soon.

@gjohansson-ST If you don't have time to review this, can you unassign and let someone else review? This has been ongoing for almost 3 months, which is a long time for a relatively simple change that's blocking other updates.

[gjohansson-ST]

Looks good. Just need to fix so CI passes (requirements fails).

[dknowles2]

Looks good. Just need to fix so CI passes (requirements fails).

Fixed.

[joostlek]

Codeowners file doesnt seem up to date, please run hassfest

[dknowles2]

Codeowners file doesnt seem up to date, please run hassfest

Done.

[joostlek]

Huh, strange that it didnt get this change from the rebase

[joostlek]

Oh right, something went wrong in another PR. We have to do another rebase soon as it doesnt belong here.

[dknowles2]

Huh, strange that it didnt get this change from the rebase

Agreed. Running hassfest again fixed it. 🤷🏻

[gjohansson-ST]

Once #100772 has merged do a rebase and this is fine to be merged (given no other CI errors)

[gjohansson-ST]

Thanks @dknowles2 👍