Bindings with several classes with the same thing action scope

[lolodomo]

It is not allowed to have several classes with the same thing action scope.
Here are the bindings not respecting this rule:

• caddx
• deconz
• freeboxos
• hue
• openwebnet

[clinique]

I assume the correct way is like it is done in max for example ? "max-cube", "max-device"... ?
Will provide a fix for freeboxos

[clinique]

Well @lolodomo , while I was on it I did it all.

[lolodomo]

Note that changing the scope is a breaking change for users.

For hue binding for example, I believe one is for API v1 and the other for API v2. @andrewfg can you please confirm.
We could then decide to not change the scope for the second and only change the scope of the first. Users of API v1 are now probably less than API v2.

[lolodomo]

@clinique : bindings README should be updated as the new scope has to be mentioned for each action.

[clinique]

This seems a bit counter-intuitive, I thought getActions was defined:
getActions(String bindingId, String thingUid)

but it's
getActions(String scope, String thingUid)

It's fine when there's only one action class that can define scope = bindingID

then for Caddx it would give:
val actions = getActions("caddx-zone","caddx:zone:thebridge:zone4")

correct ?

[lolodomo]

Yes, that's my understanding.

[lolodomo]

Please make a test with freeboxos binding for example to confirm.

[clinique]

I use rebootPlayer and rebootServer in Freeboxos, thus they had the same some and it used to work fine.

[lolodomo]

It is not allowed to have several classes with the same thing action scope.

This information is coming from @J-N-K . Please comment and confirm to avoid making useless changes.

[andrewfg]

I believe one is for API v1 and the other for API v2. @andrewfg can you please confirm

Yes. I think that is the case. I agree that if we should 'break' something, it should be rather in v1 than v2. But let me check in detail tomorrow..

---

EDIT: I confirm the above.

[lolodomo]

I use rebootPlayer and rebootServer in Freeboxos, thus they had the same some and it used to work fine.

That's a good reason I would prefer to have first a GO from @J-N-K before applying these breaking changes.

[lolodomo]

For information, the only binding currently using different scopes is the max binding.

[lsiepel]

Slighlty offtopic; i'm implementing some actions for the telegram binding and want to use an array as parameter. It's not working, might be something different. But the question is if i can find some documentation on allowed/supported parameters.

The method with this signature does not show up in main UI (4.3.0M4) as other methods do. I don;t see a problem with the scope, the method name is unique

    @RuleAction(label = "send a test message", description = "Send a Telegram using the Telegram API.")
    public @ActionOutput(label = "Success", type = "java.lang.Boolean") boolean sendTelegramTo(
            @ActionInput(name = "chatIds") @Nullable Long @Nullable [] chatIds,
            @ActionInput(name = "message") @Nullable String message,
            @ActionInput(name = "replyMessageId") @Nullable Integer replyMessageId,
            @ActionInput(name = "silent") @Nullable Boolean silent,
            @ActionInput(name = "messageThreadId") @Nullable Integer messageThreadId,
            @ActionInput(name = "args") @Nullable Object... args) {

[lolodomo]

The type of your parameters chatIds and args are not supported by Main UI.

The supported types are listed in this PR:
openhab/openhab-core#4392

String, boolean, Boolean, byte, Byte, short, Short, int, Integer, long, Long, float, Float, double, Double, Number, DecimalType, QuantityType<?>, LocalDateTime, LocalDate, LocalTime, ZonedDateTime, Date, Instant and Duration

Ps how a variable list of java Object could be...