[ism8] Add manufacturer Wolf to add-on name field

[holgerfriedrich]

This will show ism8 binding when users search for "wolf".

#17682 (comment)

We have two add-ons, ism8 and wolfsmartset (you will need one or the other depending on the smart home interface installed in the heating system). When a user types "wolf" into the search field of the add-on store, I would like to see both add-ons shown.

Current behaviour is as follows: Whey I search for "wolf", I get only the latter. The search mechanism seems to look at the name of the binding, but not at the description (which contains Wolf for both add-ons). Should I change the field name to "Wolf ISM8" in addon.xml or do you know a better way?

I am not sure if this should be done this way, as it feels somehow inconsistent with the actual name of the binding.

[lsiepel]

Support for the suggestion finder could also eliminate the need to search for this binding?

[jlaur]

Please regenerate the I18N properties file after this change:

openhab-addons/bundles/org.openhab.binding.ism8/src/main/resources/OH-INF/i18n/ism8.properties

Line 3 in 772026e

addon.ism8.name = ISM8 Binding

Also, when renaming the binding, for consistency it should probably also be renamed in these places:
https://github.com/openhab/openhab-addons/tree/main/bundles/org.openhab.binding.ism8#ism8-binding (the headline, see #17675)

openhab-addons/bundles/org.openhab.binding.ism8/pom.xml

Line 15 in 772026e

<name>openHAB Add-ons :: Bundles :: Ism8 Binding</name>

openhab-addons/bundles/org.openhab.binding.ism8/src/main/feature/feature.xml

Line 5 in 772026e

<feature name="openhab-binding-ism8" description="ism8 Binding" version="${project.version}">

[holgerfriedrich]

I am not sure if this is the right approach. I think that "renaming" the binding may be too much - just to give a better search experience.
Maybe it would be better to extend the search in the UI from title to the descriptions....
...and if that is too much effort, even living with the current situation might be an option.

What are your thoughts on that? @jlaur @lsiepel?

[jlaur]

I agree that bindings should not be renamed just to add search words for the UI, so if the renaming otherwise doesn't make sense or seems overkill, then I would also rather prefer one of your other suggested options.

I don't know if it is feasible to use description for the search as well, but you could try to open an issue in the openhab-webui repo. At first it seems straightforward, but when looking at a description, for example this one: "This is the binding for the ISM8 card used for Wolf heating systems or other Wolf eBus devices.", I wonder if certain words should be excluded to not give too many unrelated results. At least it looks like a simple substring matcher, but maybe there is a fancy search machine behind. 😄

[holgerfriedrich]

Support for the suggestion finder could also eliminate the need to search for this binding?

I took a Wireshark dump for about 15 mins on an ISM8 with (older) firmware 1.60:
On startup of the heating system, it shows MDNS traffic like this;

We have an entry in addons.xml,

<name>mdnsServiceType</name>
<value>_ism7._tcp.local.</value>

(I did not try out if this actually works).

The problem is, that I did not see any further activity on MDNS after startup of the heating system - and you typically do not power it down very often.
So from my perspective, auto-detection is possible, but quite limited.

[holgerfriedrich]

Thanks, @jlaur, for the feedback.

I have opened openhab/openhab-webui#2870 and will close this one.

[openhab-bot]

This pull request has been mentioned on openHAB Community. There might be relevant details there:

https://community.openhab.org/t/entsoe-binding-4-0-0-5-0-0/149699/123