PKG-17: cut 0.11.0, so SAFETY-56's wording fix and TEL-11's pv_entity can reach an installed 0.10.1

Two files, and no third. config.yaml 0.10.1 -> 0.11.0; CHANGELOG.md gains
`## 0.11.0` and three corrections to sections below it.

A MINOR BUMP, NOT A PATCH. TEL-11 adds an option - `pv_entity`, 75 keys -> 76 in
`options:` and `schema:` together - which is the same test 0.8.0, 0.9.0 and
0.10.0 were cut on. Nothing here can refuse a stored blob: the key is `str?`
with an `options:` default of "", validate.py does not mention it, no default
moved and no enum widened, so a blob that starts the add-on on 0.10.1 starts it
on 0.11.0.

THE TABLE HAS TWO ROWS AND THE WINDOW HAD FOUR MERGES. CI-9's follow-up
(9f6b9f1, `.gitea/workflows/checks.yml` only) and SEC-2 (239e120,
`docs/RELEASE.md` + README.md) are excluded under PKG-15's rule - AUDIENCE, NOT
IMPORTANCE. Neither file is under `goodwe_controller/`, neither is in the built
image, neither is in predeploy_check.py's RUNTIME tuple, and there is no version
of this add-on on which an operator can observe either. SEC-2 is the closer call
and the section argues it in full rather than asserting it: it is the more
consequential ticket of the two - it is why this release is a pull request
rather than a push to master - and it is still a procedure for whoever cuts a
release, not something the person deciding whether to press Update can act on.
Both are named in the section with pointers to PR #102 / checks.yml and PR #108
/ docs/RELEASE.md.

WHAT THE ENTRIES LET AN OPERATOR DECIDE. SAFETY-56: behaviour byte-identical
(6030175ed2ab..., reproduced in the CI image over 2390 capture reads, a 66-cell
grid stepped 120 times and six driven worlds), three surfaces named with the old
and new wording side by side - the STALE_READING line quoted onto the action log
and status page, the SAFETY-37 ERROR log line, and the readiness row that
asserted a false fact about a named entity. TEL-11: unset is byte-identical in
BOTH the control and telemetry documents, set is byte-identical in the control
document only; the three TEL-11 rows of that table were re-measured in the CI
image on this tree (control 846a10a5... twice, telemetry a443a6ce... / 4e6d1cb2...).
It is stated plainly that pv_entity is not a control input and does not change
what the loop does, and that absence publishes `unknown` rather than 0.

THREE CORRECTIONS BELOW THE NEW SECTION, WITHOUT REWRITING HISTORY. The 0.10.1
preamble said SAFETY-56 was open; the SAFETY-57 entry said its accusatory
diagnosis half was "deliberately untouched"; the 0.10.0 preamble left SAFETY-56
with no pointer while SAFETY-57 had one. All three quotations are what the
0.10.1 image actually prints and are left standing - a reader on 0.10.1 has to
recognise them - each now scoped to 0.10.1 and pointed at `## 0.11.0`.

VERIFIED. test_version_gate.py part 11 all four: 11a one contents table and the
slicer closed (302 lines under '0.11.0'), 11b 0.11.0 == config.yaml, 11c all
three RETIRED_PROVIDERS ids named - scoped to a pre-0.10.0 crossing and pointing
at `## 0.10.0`, which is where the evidence is - 11d still exactly one
`## Unreleased` below, PKG-08's, untouched. 31/31 in the CI image, checks.yml's
exact command, purged tree, `:ro`.

Not deployed and not installed. Shipping is a separate pull request from
release/1.0 into master, per docs/RELEASE.md.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU

goodwe_controller/config.yaml

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 name: GoodWe RS485 Controller
-version: "0.10.1"
+version: "0.11.0"
 slug: goodwe_controller
 description: >-
   Drives a GoodWe ES/BP battery inverter over RS485 by emulating its smart