[mybmw] Upgrade to new BMW API

[martingrassl]

This is mainly a bugfix PR to resolve the failing backend requests.

To make it work the code has been refactored and due to API changes some improvements could be made. These include:

• (improvement) fingerprint generation: You can take a look at the README how to create a fingerprint more conveniently
• (change) changed channel: charge-info has been renamed to charge-remaining
• (improvement) added channels: estimated-fuel-l-100km and estimated-fuel-mpg which calculates the estimated fuel consumption based on the range and remaining fuel liters - unfortunately such a calculation is not available for EVs as there is no information about the capacity of the battery.
• (improvement) added channel last-fetched: the last-updated timestamp is showing by when the last update of the vehicle happened. As right now you can not see from the channels if a thing is offline due to connection issues, you can check now if last-fetched is more than 5 minutes ago to identify an issue
• (fixed) remote command typos fixed
• (improvement) Finnish translation added

Co-authored-by: Mark Herwege mark.herwege@telenet.be

Fixes #14065

Also-by: Mark Herwege mark.herwege@telenet.be
Signed-off-by: Martin Grassl martin.grassl@digital-filestore.de

[jlaur]

@martingrassl - thank you! I have briefly looked at the README, and I noticed that you have reverted the fixes made in #13866. So please go through that and revert those changes.

[martingrassl]

@martingrassl - thank you! I have briefly looked at the README, and I noticed that you have reverted the fixes made in #13866. So please go through that and revert those changes.

@jlaur Oh thanks for pointing that out. I didn't see that in my comparisons. I'll change it tomorrow, sorry for that.

[martingrassl]

@martingrassl - thank you! I have briefly looked at the README, and I noticed that you have reverted the fixes made in #13866. So please go through that and revert those changes.

Hi @jlaur, I fixed the markdown issues according to the changes of #13866. I installed the markdownlint extension to VSCode and it looks like it applies the same rules. I'm just wondering if this linting check could be somehow integrated into the Maven process so that it fails when there is an issue like with spotless for Java code...

[jlaur]

I'm just wondering if this linting check could be somehow integrated into the Maven process so that it fails when there is an issue like with spotless for Java code...

See here: #13858

[weymann]

Thx for taking the task to bring this binding in working mode again. As stated in the communnity I don't have a BMW anymore so I'm not able test the functionality anymore-
@jlaur Will you add @martingrassl as codeowner too?

[jlaur]

Thx for taking the task to bring this binding in working mode again. As stated in the communnity I don't have a BMW anymore so I'm not able test the functionality anymore- @jlaur Will you add @martingrassl as codeowner too?

@weymann - since you just approved of this, @martingrassl - if you agree, please add yourself to the CODEOWNERS file in context of this PR. 🙂

[weymann]

Modify CODEOWNERS file and put yourself as codeowner. You can also remove me due to the fact I'm not in charge anymore.

[martingrassl]

@jlaur I added @mherwege as well as he did a great job in supporting me bringing the add-on back to life. And he has good ideas for further enhancements :)

[jlaur]

I added @mherwege as well as he did a great job in supporting me bringing the add-on back to life. And he has good ideas for further enhancements :)

If that's okay with @mherwege, great. 👍

[martingrassl]

just in case you missed it, there are still a few minor comments open from this review iteration: #14452 (review)

Hmmm but I fixed all of them? Can you tell me what you exactly mean?

I checked them all and left those open that are not addressed by either a commit or comment. So I think you can just go through them. Remember to "show hidden". 🙂

Ok I missed the hidden ones. I was not aware that GH hides unresolved ones as well... thanks for pointing this out. I'll fix them today evening.

[jlaur]

LGTM. @martingrassl - thanks again for the contribution! Is the PR ready for being merged from your perspective?

[martingrassl]

LGTM. @martingrassl - thanks again for the contribution! Is the PR ready for being merged from your perspective?

@jlaur from my perspective it is ready for a long time - it would be a great Christmas present if it would be merged into 4.1.0 ;) thanks for your thorough review and the time you put into doing that, your comments helped me understanding the matter a bit better!

Now it just looks like @lsiepel has to approve the review, right?

[jlaur]

Now it just looks like @lsiepel has to approve the review, right?

It seems all comments from @lsiepel are resolved, and that there are no further comments: #14452 (review) (and btw, thanks for the review, @lsiepel 👍)

So we can merge, and get this binding working again.