Kai Kreuzer
Kai Kreuzer
If I see it correctly, the PR at hand more or less corresponds to option (3), which is clearly the least intrusive. I like the separation between `State` and `HistoricState`...
> Where can I find this limitation? I don't think this is anywhere explicitely written, but it is an implicit assumption by the overall design. As mentioned, the UIs e.g....
@msteigenberger Are you aware of any regressions here? openHAB 3.1 release build will be done tomorrow, so if there's an easy fix, it would be great if you could do...
@mstormi Why do you think so? I think it is a valid request and I'd like to see OpenJ9 support as well. @fragger42 figured out a bug that happens when...
No, I do not know any way how to do that...
> Apparently no change is now accepted. We can decide what gets accepted or not. My position in the discussion so far was merely that I don't know whether such...
@markus7017 Did you see @robnielsen's review comments?
@J-N-K I guess this issue here would be simpler to address than #3000, because it is actually not about adding a timestamp to the state, but adding a timestamp of...
@jbaudisch Yes, you are right, that's why I said that this request here is slightly different (and hence easier) than #3000, which deals with item state timestamps. So as we...
@jbaudisch I would agree with @digitaldan and @spacemanspiff2007 that persisting the events sounds like the best fit for your usecase - your logic would then be able to very flexibly...