Does this rule look correct ?
-
@cw-kid Ok then I guess Groups and Rule Sets arent exactly the same. You can still nestle all the other conditions into one Rule Set though for simplicity's sake.
Yes that is how I expect Rule Result to work. You can use this rule without having to re-create the same conditions every time.
@pabla said in Does this rule look correct ?:
Yes that is how I expect Rule Result to work. You can use this rule without having to re-create the same conditions every time
Yes that makes sense for Triggers.
@pabla said in Does this rule look correct ?:
You can still nestle all the other conditions into one Rule Set though for simplicity's sake
I'm not sure how to do that for constraints though.
If you look at my first screen shot above in the Constraints area, they are all my conditions.
So if those particular set of conditions I wanted to use again else where, your saying I could potentially create a new rule with just those conditions or constraints in that rule.
And then maybe reference them in another different new rule.
EDIT: Unless I made the primary template rule lets call it, if I put my constraints in to the triggers area of that rule instead.
I could then call that primary template rule from other rules using the "Rule Results" option.
If that makes sense, probably not LOL.
-
Please note that Pabla is making a recommendation for Vera Reactor, and cw-kid is asking a question about MSR.
Author of Multi-system Reactor and Reactor, DelayLight, Switchboard, and about a dozen other plugins that run on Vera and openLuup.
-
Please note that Pabla is making a recommendation for Vera Reactor, and cw-kid is asking a question about MSR.
@toggledbits said in Does this rule look correct ?:
Please note that Pabla is making a recommendation for Vera Reactor, and cw-kid is asking a question about MSR.
Yes I think I am in over my head here, thought MSR was closer related to the Vera plugin.. I think you are on the right track though
-
Pretty much all spot on. @Pabla I think there's enough of the Vera Reactor flavor for you to be comfortable once you start playing with it. The big differences are coming out in this thread. No ReactorSensors, but you can use Rule Sets to organize your rules. No activities (reactions in MSR) on groups, but you can make active groups into rules so they can have reactions. This is one of the big things the importer does... it scans through your ReactorSensor data finding groups that have activities and turns them into independent rules, leaving an MSR rule condition where the group was to preserve the logic (analogous to a Group State condition in Vera Reactor, as if you had moved the group elsewhere). The other big difference is the addition of Constraints as a passive filter. I say passive because changes in the conditions under Constraints can't initiate action in the rule; only a change in the state of Triggers does that. But all of the alternative tools one would use to get the same effect in Vera Reactor (e.g. sequencing option) are still there.
@cw-kid, I definitely think you're getting the hang of it.
-
Looks like you can do what I said.
I have created some "Global Rules"
One for "Night" which I've set as Civil Dusk till Civil Dawn
In another rule I can add it as a "Rule Result" within the Constrains (Conditions) area of that rule.
I think that should work then.
-
Looks like you can do what I said.
I have created some "Global Rules"
One for "Night" which I've set as Civil Dusk till Civil Dawn
In another rule I can add it as a "Rule Result" within the Constrains (Conditions) area of that rule.
I think that should work then.
-
I really like the idea of constraints, in Vera reactor to have something similar you'd have to have a bunch of sub-groups within other sub-groups. Well done @toggledbits
@pabla said in Does this rule look correct ?:
Well done @toggledbits
I can't take credit. When I first made contact with Hass... four? really? OK... four years ago, it was something it had that looked pretty interesting.
-
T toggledbits locked this topic on
