Add methods to start and stop detection

[nonsleepr]

Add methods async_stop_detection and async_start_detection to the camera object.

[bachya]

Thanks! Just a few comments. I assume you've tested this on your own cameras?

[nonsleepr]

Tested it with my doorbell. I bet the cameras would return different properties.

Also, one interesting thing, switching to Home/Away in the app under one user wouldn't affect any properties as seen by another user (haven't checked with the same user).

[FuzzyMistborn]

Also, one interesting thing, switching to Home/Away in the app under one user wouldn't affect any properties as seen by another user (haven't checked with the same user).

You're referring to the "schedule" tab? I can confirm it does update for the other user.

Thanks for the PR!

[nonsleepr]

So, the arm/disarm feature is per user, not per device?

Any ETA as to when to expect the change in PyPI?

[FuzzyMistborn]

I'm not sure to be honest. All I know is i have one doorbell and 2 accounts. I currently enable/disable the motion sensing using the security tab. I switch between "home" and "disarmed." I don't know how this would play if i had accounts with different cameras on it, but with 2 accounts and a single shared camera when I change the setting on one it affects the other. I don't know how the enable/disable the actual motion detection setting would work.

[FuzzyMistborn]

And in terms of PyPI, that's @bachya 's domain. If he's busy I can give it a whirl tonight but no promises.

[nonsleepr]

My current understanding is that the motion detection is the camera setting and affects all users, while Security tab in the app (with Home/Away/Disarmed/Schedule options) is per user.

[FuzzyMistborn]

Hmm, that's not my experience but again I'm just dealing with a single camera so my results may be different
Also looks like PyPi should be pushed soon https://github.com/FuzzyMistborn/python-eufy-security/releases/tag/0.2.0

[bachya]

@nonsleepr I neglected to notice this, but there aren't tests for your new code. I'm okay pushing 0.2.0 without them, but should you get the time, perhaps you could write some?

[bachya]

Okay, 0.2.0 is published.

[nonsleepr]

My bad with the tests. Would spend more time on that in other PRs.

[nonsleepr]

Is 0.2.0 published to PyPI as well? I don't see it there.

[bachya]

Yes: https://pypi.org/project/python-eufy-security/ – I accidentally published to a different name.

[rpitera]

Will the HA PR be updated or can we simply alter the requirements in manifest.json and restart? Would like to help test and have another cam coming on Friday. :)

[nonsleepr]

I'm not sure about PR, I personally feel it's quite far from the state where it could have been merged into HA.

You can use my version compatible with HACS though: https://github.com/nonsleepr/ha-eufy-security.

[bachya]

FWIW, I have a draft HASS PR (home-assistant/core#28443), but I agree with @nonsleepr: we have a ways to go before this is ready to be un-drafted.

@rpitera, FYI, your idea about adjusting manifest.json should work fine.

[nonsleepr]

It's adjusted in my repo. @Bacha, do you want to take ownership of it? Or maybe we could create a team?

[rpitera]

@nonsleepr - I've been using your repo manually; had no idea it was HACS compatible. I'll add the repo in HACS and use that.
@bachya - Thanks.

BTW guys, thanks for your hard work on this. I'm pretty happy with the results so far. Enough that I went out and ordered a third camera.

[bachya]

@nonsleepr We shouldn’t have separate, disparate repos attacking the same problem. I’d be open to an organization if this repo and yours do fundamentally different things.

[FuzzyMistborn]

I think for now while we're still ironing out issues, having @nonsleepr 's separate repo is convenient to easily update via HACS. Once we get it merged to HASS officially I think the repo won't be needed, but until then it might get more people testing as it's more convenient/easy.

[nonsleepr]

It's not the same problem: we have a client library and an integration library.
I thought a bit more and now I don't think we're ready for an organization, not at that stage.
Merging HA integration and the client package into one isn't recommended either, that would have helped with pre-releases though.