[tacmi] Support JSON-Api

[cmorty]

This implementation is based on the JSON-API provided by TA.

The API is provided here: https://wiki.ta.co.at/C.M.I._JSON-API

[cmorty]

@Wolfgang1966, @marvkis : Seems like I finally tricked the Null-Checker into working. The one running in the CI is even more broken then my local one ( 2022-03 ), which was happy with just reassigning to a local variable. I'm looking forward to a code review.

[Wolfgang1966]

Hi @cmorty , a great thank you for adding the JSON API! Just this morning I fell into a value scaling problem with the CoE interface after updating the firmware of my CMI (KW now are read ten times smaller than they really are, I correct this by a rule at the moment).

Do you have a test version of your binding somewhere to download? I would really like to switch to JSON with my UVR1611 and hence would like to beta-test your binding.

In parallel I start reviewing your PR. But as I would not consider myself a good Java programmer or too familiar with the coding standards of openHAB, so I would be glad if someone else with better knowledge in this topics would review it also.

[cmorty]

@Wolfgang1966 : The build-log says that it should be available under https://openhab.jfrog.io/openhab/libs-pullrequest-local/org/openhab/addons/bundles/org.openhab.binding.tacmi/4.0.0-SNAPSHOT/org.openhab.binding.tacmi-4.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar - I'm missing a PR-ID in that URL though. If it doesn't work: Ping me and I'll provide you with a jar.

You were automatically added as reviewer (not my choice). I'm a C++ developer. But the CI does quite a lot of checks, thus the most important issue probably is to make sure the code is sane. ;-)

[Wolfgang1966]

Dear @cmorty, overall it looks good to me. I found only some small potential improvements.

Thanks again for your efforts

[Wolfgang1966]

LGTM. 👍

[lolodomo]

Review part 1 of 2.
Remains doc, handler, Value and tests

[Elgin1]

Hi @cmorty , nice that your're integrating the JSON API into the binding!

Having recently fought with my CMI to get all the values into openHAB with a lengthy Javascript rule myself, I was wondering:
Does your code take into account that you can only query one node per minute and then the next node has to be queried a minute later and so on? I ended up with an interval of 65 sec between reading out each one of my three nodes to get things stable for several days in the end without the CMI complaining about too many requests.

I haven't spotted anything in that direction during the (admittedly short) look I have given your code, hence my question...

[cmorty]

Hi @cmorty , nice that your're integrating the JSON API into the binding!

Having recently fought with my CMI to get all the values into openHAB with a lengthy Javascript rule myself, I was wondering: Does your code take into account that you can only query one node per minute and then the next node has to be queried a minute later and so on? I ended up with an interval of 65 sec between reading out each one of my three nodes to get things stable for several days in the end without the CMI complaining about too many requests.

I haven't spotted anything in that direction during the (admittedly short) look I have given your code, hence my question...

Yes it does. Even has a configuration option. As I updated OpenHab it looks like I actually want to look into this again. ;)

[cmorty]

The last push also fixes some null-checks. Seems like Eclipse evaluates assert (and complains if I add an additional null-check), while OpenHab is compiled without (and complains about a possible null). I rewrote a bit of the code, but didn't test it yet. The code should be trivial enough, but I've thought that before. :) Will test it tomorrow.

[lsiepel]

Thanks for moving this forward! Looked at the remaining files, think this is the last review.

[lsiepel]

Have some found left overs and two new comments. Otherwise LGTM.

[lsiepel]

@cmorty we are almost there, are you able to fix the last few comments?

[lsiepel]

Added 4 commits to resolve my last own comments. Removing logging etc.
@jlaur are you able to verify the last changes i made. I just don't want to merge my own changes, even though they are very small.

Edit: arg i ddidn;t expect these new license header issues. Let me fix that too.

[jlaur]

@jlaur are you able to verify the last changes i made. I just don't want to merge my own changes, even though they are very small.

The last four commits so far LGTM.

[lsiepel]

Fixing the headers (the fork is 2500 commits behind)