POC: add unified devices method#151
Open
karlbeecken wants to merge 11 commits intoerwindouna:mainfrom
Open
Conversation
wmalgadey
added
the
enhancement
wmalgadey
reviewed
Feb 25, 2026
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Collaborator
I like this approach. @erwindouna what do you think? Is that a way to go with the x devices? |
wmalgadey
approved these changes
Mar 6, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Proposed Changes
This is a proof of concept on how a "unified method" to access certain features indepent from the underlying API version / tado line could look like.
Discussion on the approach is very welcome, right now I did focus on not breaking the existing v3 interface.
It would, of course, be much, much cleaner to remove all current v3 methods from the main
Tadoclass, only have the unified methods at this level and provide separate classes for the two different APIs.Or, maybe even cleaner, have an abstract base class with separate classes implementing the two APIs, like it was done for PyTado v1.0: https://github.com/wmalgadey/PyTado/tree/master/PyTado/interface/api.
Either of this would of course break compatibility to previous releases, so would probably mean a 1.0 release for this library, too 😇
Related Issues
Sort-of depends on #143, although you can still use it if you set the
_tado_linemanually to eitherTadoLine.LINE_XorTadoLine.PRE_LINE_X.Related to #136.