[linktap] Initial contribution

[dag81]

[linkTap] Initial code commit.

[lsiepel]

Thank you for creating this PR to contribute this binding. As this is still a draft it won’t be reviewed yet, but I had a quick peek and would like to comment upfront.
To manage expectations; review capacity is somewhat limited so don’t expect an immediate full review. To speed up the process you can already perform a self-review by checking this list: https://github.com/openhab/openhab-addons/wiki/Review-Checklist
For example one of the improvements that should be made is to adhere to the naming convention lower-case-hyphen for channel id’s etc. For reference: https://www.openhab.org/docs/developer/guidelines.html#naming-convention

[dag81]

Thank you for creating this PR to contribute this binding. As this is still a draft it won’t be reviewed yet, but I had a quick peek and would like to comment upfront. To manage expectations; review capacity is somewhat limited so don’t expect an immediate full review. To speed up the process you can already perform a self-review by checking this list: https://github.com/openhab/openhab-addons/wiki/Review-Checklist For example one of the improvements that should be made is to adhere to the naming convention lower-case-hyphen for channel id’s etc. For reference: https://www.openhab.org/docs/developer/guidelines.html#naming-convention

Thank you I'll work through it before changing to a non-draft PR to save any time wastage.

[lsiepel]

Sure - I did that before on a different PR and they preferred resolving them :) More than happy to thumb's up - I just need to track which ones I've been through - will switch to that now.

Oh, another request ;-) could you try not to use force-push as by then it is harder to track progress. If you just commit and push it should be fine.

[dag81]

Sure - I did that before on a different PR and they preferred resolving them :) More than happy to thumb's up - I just need to track which ones I've been through - will switch to that now.

Oh, another request ;-) could you try not to use force-push as by then it is harder to track progress. If you just commit and push it should be fine.

Now I know its being looked at I'll push the changes in different commits - you were very quick at getting on it - thank you. I presume when merged the whole lot can be squashed at that point.

[dag81]

Hi @lsiepel, I believe there's approx 3 bits left which I'll look at tomorrow evening if I have time. I've just pushed everything from tonight, thank you for all the work reviewing. Anything with a thumb's up I've hopefully / potentially covered in the feedback 1 push.

I don't know if you want to wait for all to be addressed or am happy to start resolving any your happy with now, but figured I'll let you know either way.

P.S On the servlet question, the gateway basically pushes event's via http. The servlet is to receive these pushes from the gateway itself. Obviously if it can't for whatever reason the system will fallback to a polling less responsive design after it hasn't receive certain data for so long, but hopefully for the majority of users, this will cover the majority of openHAB's user base.

[dag81]

Hi @lsiepel, thanks for all the time again tonight reviewing. I think I've caught up now and all the comments are addressed. Since the push ending with the text Feedback 8.

[lsiepel]

Finished the review and covered the full binding. Nice to see there are no compile and SAT warnings. After these comments are addressed i expect this PR to be in a mergable state, so we are getting close now.

[lsiepel]

Suggested change

private static final double GW_LITRES_M3_CONVERSION_RATIO = 3.785;

No need for this as the framework can do it for you. See next few comments as they belong together

[lsiepel]

Suggested change

	}
	updateState(DEVICE_CHANNEL_FLOW_RATE, new QuantityType<>(speed,
	"L".equals(volumeUnit) ? Units.LITRE_PER_MINUTE : ImperialUnits.GALLON_PER_MINUTE));

[lsiepel]

Suggested change

	}
	updateState(DEVICE_CHANNEL_CURRENT_VOLUME,
	new QuantityType<>(volume, "L".equals(volumeUnit) ? Units.LITRE : ImperialUnits.GALLON_LIQUID_US));

[lsiepel]

Suggested change

	}
	updateState(DEVICE_CHANNEL_FAILSAFE_VOLUME, new QuantityType<>(volumeLimit,
	"L".equals(volumeUnit) ? Units.LITRE_PER_MINUTE : ImperialUnits.GALLON_PER_MINUTE));

[lsiepel]

No need to do manual conversion, leave it to the framework.

Suggested change

	private static final double GW_LITRES_M3_CONVERSION_RATIO = 3.785;