Announcement - Changes to Legacy SmartThings Platform


#1

The Future of WC with loss of ST Classic?
How does latest SmartThings announcement affect future of webCoRE?
Smartthings to begin removing legacy features
#2

I would really like to hear what the plan is for Webcore regarding this transition. AFAIK there hasn’t been much done to get it migrated to the Rules API or any of the other new APIs. So with Groovy being retired in the “next several months”, that sounds like a lot of work in a short period of time.


#3

Personally, I have zero interest in the new API or app until working variables are added…
(if they try to push me over without that implemented, I am tapping out)

If I had to guesstimate, I’d say that maybe 98% of my 450+ pistons use at least one variable.


#4

I think this will finally push me to get off my a$ and migrate my devices to HE.


#5

Supposedly this is on the roadmap for the Rules API, but I haven’t heard anything lately. Hell, I don’t think durations are even live on the Rules API yet (i.e. no motion for 5 minutes, open 10 minutes, etc.)


#6

Ugh, this is do scary for me. My house is completely automated using WebCore. Very few voice commands. Everything is done based on motion, temperature, ambient light, open/closed sensors and more virtual switches than you can shake a stick at.


#7

I would not stress. The creator of webCoRE (Adrian) is a wizard when it comes to programming, and he is now employed by SmartThings, and actively working on webCoRE v2.

The only reason I am a bit hesitant is the fear that his new boss might try to control the development path, or worse, prevent him from adding certain elements…


#8

I don’t share your level of optimism. The last we saw of our grand wizard was a video in which @ady624 essentially said that while it might be possible to develop a version of webCoRE to work with the new Rules API, such a project would have to developed by the community without any substantive support from SmartThings. And if you listen to the latest podcast, it doesn’t sound as if things have changed in that regard. They don’t want to offend us, but they don’t exactly want to support us either. We are the unwanted stepchild.

Of course, one could argue that the original webCoRE was also a community-based project, but its success was mostly the result of Adrian’s intense passion and skillful programming. Since he joined Samsung, he has been busy elsewhere (and I’m not faulting him for that, mind you) and webCoRE has languished, surviving primarily due to the efforts of our dedicated minions. Unless another @ady624 steps up, I don’t think the future is all that promising.

It’s possible, of course, there’s been some substantial discourse on this subject behind the scenes in the non-public section of this forum or elsewhere, and development has or is advancing far beyond my knowledge or expectations. I hope so. I really want to be wrong about this. In the meantime, as we get closer to the day in 2021 when the groovy platform is shut down, I’m going to be looking hard at my options.

Maybe I’m just pessimistic because, well … 2020. :thinking:


#9

I have no confirmation, but the (simplified) impression I got was:

  • SmartThings is responsible for the API
  • Adrian (webCoRE v2) will handle the “Rule Engine”…
  • …and the community (or devs) are responsible for creating handlers…

Do you have a link to this?


#10

Sorry, I meant to include one in my post and forgot. There’s a link in the discussion I’ve been following here.


#11

Thanks for that link. The interview with ST head of engineering begins at 39:30.


#12

I am by no means a fly on the wall but I don’t think @ady624 would have done a gap analysis in as detailed as he did if he wasn’t trying to keep similar albeit more streamlined functionality in rules engine.

The way I understood it, i will have two choices: transfer everything to RE manually or transfer everything to Hubitat. Both have the same pain point of moving everything over. Unless there is a migration tool (but I don’t think the Webcore users are a be enough demographic for samsung to care).


#13

I don’t disagree with that. But the existence of functionality in the Rules Engines does not automatically ensure that we will have a user-friendly webCoRE-style interface to work with, which is what many of us want and Adrian indicated the community, not SmartThings, would have to build. (Also, he did say there would be no simple migration, even if a webCoRE II is built).

Perhaps we’ll all be satisfied with the final implementation of the Rules Engine and won’t care. I hope so if that’s the course we have to chart, but I’m skeptical.


#14

Here are my questions regarding webCoRE and the next steps with SmartThings.

Will it be recoded and transitioned over to new Rules API? Will it gain capability of local execution? Will old pistons continue to work? Is webCoRE still being further developed at all?


#15

Adrian, the creator of webCoRE, is now employed by SmartThings, and is actively working on webCoRE v2.

I believe it is being written from scratch, but the UI looked somewhat familiar in the alpha screen shots I have seen. The goal (from Samsung’s perspective) is to keep everything local (so we stop hammering their servers :grin:)

Pistons will have to be re-written, but similar logic should still apply.
(certain elements, like variables, are on the timeline, but I have not actually seen in use yet)

I posted about a dozen screen shots of an alpha version a few months back…


#16

Knowing Adrian, this is likely true. But has there been any actual confirmation of that since the “proof-of-concept” presentation last year? Again, I had the distinct impression that, even if he did create webCoRE II, it would not be on Samsung’s dime.


#17

Then what are they paying him for?
Why would he show off an unpaid “side project” at the giant conference?


Of course, if they are not paying for the UI to be built, it means that there will be no (corporate) restrictions on the final product.


#18

My understanding has always been that they hired him to help develop the Rules API, and that he was recruited in large part because of his accomplishments with webCoRE. I don’t believe he was hired to develop webCoRE II and I’ve seen no evidence that has changed. I was hopeful you might prove me wrong.

My impression was that SmartThings allowed him to show proof of concept for a webCoRE II to show support for the webCoRE community, which is a small but vocal subset of SmartThings users. But Adrian clearly (in my opinion) suggested that while SmartThings was supportive of the idea of webCoRE II development, they did not intend to devote any financial or other resources to the project, meaning all development would be community based.

I’m not trying to argue with you or anyone else nor be a Debbie Downer on the subject. I’m just hoping to separate fact from speculation as those of us invested in webCoRE want to be able to make informed decisions going forward to 2021. As it stands we have no published roadmap and no clear commitment from anyone, only a promise that groovy will disappear in the future.

And that we can surely agree would be ideal, so long as the passion and skill exists in the community to produce a viable alternative to what we have now.


#19

You may very well be right, @bthrock…

Adrian and I are not kicking back in the local bar, so I do not have an “inside” perspective in that sense.

I guess the way I am looking at it is, Adrian’s masterpiece (webCoRE) was designed to work around the limitations in the old groovy based system… Now that he is working directly with the new “system”, I imagine that future hurdles will not be so challenging to overcome. (we finally have a guy on the inside, who is aware of previous obstacles, and will likely program with that in mind)

All that being said, I believe that the creator(s) of the new GUI should definitely be financially compensated for their work.


#20

Is there a beta group for this yet or is it all word-of-mouth still?