master
8
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Claude dev agent
|
902524ae5e |
OPT-11 P3: price runs per battery
Cheap and expensive hours as runs of consecutive firm price slots
(priceruns.py); each battery's role per tick from its mode (modetrade.py):
grid charging for Leftover solar / Cheap hours only, never Solar first;
holding for the expensive runs; selling per battery (pack_sell) above the
spread and the floor. The site trade is sized inside the modes (loop bound)
and the peak guard's headroom; a run edge reseeds the loop. Cheap hours only
and selling are enabled on the Batteries screen and in the HA select
(appended). The site Why row no longer says "held back" when the peak limit
pushes power up (F2). Modes off: byte-identical to
|
||
 adminandClaude Opus 5.5
|
c664e38ef4 |
OPT-11 P2 review: refusals stay counted, removals survive a start with no broker
- A refusal past the log-once set or the 32 cap is counted in the log at 1, 10, 100 and so on, so a repeated attack stays visible. - The logged topic is printable only (no forged log lines). - mode_announcement(): the start-up store logic, now tested with a real Store. A removed config topic stays stored, so a start with no broker cannot forget it (rename case tested). - A test ties each HA mode option to the page's English name. - packmode.enabled() is tested for "true", 1 and "false". - Retained-command text, DOCS and DECISIONS updated to match. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5.5
|
b310282729 |
OPT-11 P2: HA entities for battery modes
Each battery gets an MQTT-discovered Mode select and Use switch, only while
battery_modes_enabled is true. Commands go through handle_action(), the
/action path; refusals are logged once. Retained commands are never applied.
Turning modes off removes exactly the configs announced (kept in the store).
With modes off the announcement is byte-identical to
|
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
0ef9565071 |
TEL-12: several PV inverters, and one absent member is an absent TOTAL
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m59s
0.11.0 shipped `pv_entity` as a single string. The reference site's owner reported within minutes of it going live that they have several PV inverters and could configure one - which is ordinary for a multi-string roof, not a property of one house. `pv_entities` is the roster and the row carries the SITE total. ⚠️ THE HARD PART IS ABSENCE, NOT THE LIST. Three configured, one `unavailable`, and the sum of the other two is a SMALLER NUMBER INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM A REAL ONE. Read back by OPT-10 that says "there was less PV than there was" - the "no irradiance" conclusion the channel exists to TEST. So `pv.total()` answers `None` the moment any configured entity is absent: the topic carries HA's own `None`, the entity goes to `unknown`, the recorder records a GAP. The alternative (the partial sum beside a contributor count) was implemented and run as mutation N1b; it loses because the MQTT row is read COLD a week later by an attribution that would believe it, while the qualifying count would live in a second entity with its own history. The partial information is not thrown away - the STATUS PAGE names every entity that reported, with its watts, and every one that did not, with its reason, because that surface is read LIVE by a human who wants the diagnostic. ⚠️ AND THE MIRROR: a member honestly reporting 0 W is SUMMED. The test is `is None`, never falsiness - a roster that blanked the site on a zero would report an absence on every clear evening. THE SURFACE IS MEASURED, NOT PREFERRED. `pv_entity` could not become a list: tools/supervisor_shape_probe.py §G shows Supervisor 2026.08.0 answering an 0.11.0 install's stored string with `Invalid list for option 'pv_entity'`, and deepmerge's list strategy is `override` so a `[]` default does not rescue it - the live add-on would not start. `match(.*)?` does accept both shapes and is rejected for a different, measured reason: it validates nothing (a string, a list and the integer 417 all pass) and renders as a plain text box. So `pv_entities` joins `pv_entity` and REPLACES it when set, CFG-04's rule for `inverters:`, with a status caution saying which key won - a union would double-count the inverter the old key still names. STILL NOT A CONTROL INPUT. tools/tel11_pv_trace.py was extended rather than replaced and now grades five claims over three document sets. The control hash is UNMOVED - 846a10a5b89e… on `unset` and on `one`, on both trees - and the roster control document is byte-identical between the two trees. 2/5 is a claim TEL-11 could not make: with 0.11.0 as the baseline, "one entity behaves exactly as 0.11.0 does" is a real cross-tree identity over control AND telemetry. ⚠️ TEL-11's OWN `--compare` REFUSAL HAD TO CHANGE, and that is MUTATION.md habit 24: a discriminator defined as "the baseline lacks this feature" dies on the release that ships the feature, and dies as a false refusal. Twelve mutations, each on a fresh purged `cp -a`, no survivors. N5 is +0 B (`sum` -> `max`, the same three characters) and was run on a fresh copy with `cmp` confirming the edit on disk. The fixture is three distinct NON-ZERO contributions in two units with absence driven at EVERY position - a member contributing 0 W could go absent without moving the sum of the rest, which is habit 23 with a coinciding value in the arithmetic rather than in the plant. 31/31 in the CI image. Not deployable as merged: config.yaml stays at 0.11.0, so predeploy_check.py reports a NO-OP until PKG cuts a version. A CHANGELOG entry is wanted and deliberately not written - 11b forbids `## Unreleased` and the bump is PKG's call; DECISIONS/TEL-12-several-pv-inverters.md is the material it needs. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
07ba3433ed |
TEL-11: PV production stops being invisible, and stays out of the control law
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 8m6s
OPT-10 measured that this site's pack reaches 90 % SoC on 2 days of 16 and that
20.5 kWh of surplus left the site while the pack had room - 12.6 kWh of it with
the battery not charging at all - and could not say WHY, because PV production
is recorded NOWHERE. Three causes need three different fixes (no irradiance:
nothing to fix; a charge-power limit; the optimiser declining to charge, which
is the only software defect) and guessing between them is how an optimiser gets
tuned to solve a cloud problem. This card adds the channel. It does not do the
attribution.
AN HA ENTITY, NOT A REGISTER, AND THAT IS A PRODUCT DECISION. This add-on's
RS485 bus carries the BATTERY inverter it drives; a household's PV inverter is
normally a different box from a different vendor reporting into Home Assistant
through its own integration. `pv_entity` takes whatever `sensor.*` the site's
own PV integration provides, any brand HA can read.
POSITIVE IS PRODUCTION, AND THERE IS NO `pv_invert`. The convention is derived
rather than assumed: `meter_entity` is positive when IMPORTING and `batt_entity`
is positive when DISCHARGING (DOCS.md, Sources), both of which are "power
arriving at the house's AC bus", and production arrives there too. Those two
keys carry invert flags because they are BIPOLAR and are READ BY THE CONTROL
PATH - `inv.batt` feeds SAFETY-30's per-unit sign check and SAFETY-31's
circulating-power sensor, so a reversed sensor hands the site a plausible number
it acts on. Production is unipolar and is read by nothing: a reversed sensor
announces itself as -4 kW at noon in the very history this card creates, and a
flag would only let an installer hide it. No negative-value alarm either - a PV
inverter's own standby draw makes a small negative reading at night ordinary, so
any threshold would be a number nobody measured.
ABSENCE IS NEVER ZERO, AND "DROPPED" IS NOT ABSENT. `publish()` SKIPS a None,
which is right for `circulation` and exactly wrong here: a skipped row leaves
Home Assistant holding the last number forever and the recorder draws a FLAT
LINE through the outage, which is indistinguishable from a measurement and
manufactures the "there was no surplus" conclusion this card exists to TEST. So
the absence is published, with HA's own payload: `mqtt/const.py` declares
`PAYLOAD_NONE = "None"` and `mqtt/sensor.py` tests it BEFORE the numeric branch,
so the entity's state becomes `unknown` and the recorder stores a GAP. Read out
of home-assistant/core `dev` on 2026-09-24 and quoted at the constant.
`ABSENT_AS_UNKNOWN` is a one-key set and the suite asserts `circulation: None`
is STILL dropped.
THE UNIT IS READ OFF THE ENTITY. `mW`, `W`, `kW`, `MW`, `GW`, `TW` - HA's own
`UnitOfPower`, every factor an exact power of ten. A sensor with no unit, or a
unit outside that table, is REFUSED by name and the status page says which.
`read_inputs()`'s `abs(raw) < 50` kW-or-W guess is safe for a quarter-hour
demand forecast and is NOT safe here: 30 W of dusk is an ordinary reading and
that heuristic would publish it as 30 kW.
GENUINELY OPTIONAL, AND NOT A SECOND `price_now_entity`. validate.py does not
mention the key - it cannot conflict with anything, because nothing else reads
it. The MQTT row lives in a new `OPTIONAL_SENSORS` list whose `include` argument
DEFAULTS TO EMPTY, so every caller that has never heard of `pv_entity` -
test_mqtt.py's fixtures, tools/rehearse_roster.py, anything written next year -
announces exactly what it announced before. Unset: no state call at all, no
entity, no topic, no status row, no page row. Set and failing: a CAUTION
(`ok=False, warn=True`), never a `bad` row, so a telemetry channel can never put
a battery site into NOT READY.
IT MUST NOT BECOME A CONTROL INPUT, AND THAT IS GRADED TWICE. `test_pv.py`
part 6 drives 40 cycles of the real `cycle()` and asserts the commands are
bit-identical across unset / no reading / 0 W / 8 kW, with a COMPUTED census
(33 modules under app/) showing the material is mentioned in exactly three:
pv.py, main.py, mqtt.py. `tools/tel11_pv_trace.py` is the cross-tree half -
`safety56_behaviour_trace.py`'s pattern with a DIFFERENT control clause, because
this card's claim is that nothing differs rather than that only sentences do: it
REFUSES unless the two `app/` fingerprints differ and unless exactly one side
reacts to the option. Measured on 41 stimulus cells:
control release/1.0 unset 846a10a5b89e321086d535825925721e2f791012e8405948d4fd38d3f9d0be5f
control TEL-11 unset 846a10a5b89e321086d535825925721e2f791012e8405948d4fd38d3f9d0be5f
control TEL-11 set 846a10a5b89e321086d535825925721e2f791012e8405948d4fd38d3f9d0be5f
telemetry release/1.0 unset a443a6ceaffe072b44bcd5f2ad946c1ed6c9e01b69e278eca631f7f4d7892164
telemetry TEL-11 unset a443a6ceaffe072b44bcd5f2ad946c1ed6c9e01b69e278eca631f7f4d7892164
telemetry TEL-11 set 4e6d1cb289a957223ad0205f732a6fec6110ce1f2032c98ad60694e67625274f
UNSET is byte-identical in BOTH documents, which is stronger than "the control
path is untouched": an install that does not set the option sees no change of
any kind, announcement and status rows included.
⚠️ AND THE CARD'S CENTRAL MUTATION WAS A SURVIVOR ON THE FIRST BATTERY.
`self.grid -= self.pv_w` in `read_inputs()` - +106 B, on disk, purged, genuinely
running - came back GREEN, because the fixture drove a 6 kW export over 12
cycles, which puts the loop AGAINST ITS RAIL: a command moving `slew_w` every
cycle produces the same ramp for -6000 W and for -14 000 W of apparent error.
MUTATION.md habit 23 with a saturated ACTUATOR in place of a coinciding value,
and it is in that file now as the habit's second instance. The fixture now
drives a 600 W import the loop SETTLES on, against a responsive meter, and asks
habit 23's own question as its own check: shift the METER by the same 8 kW and
confirm the commands really would have moved.
Evidence: 31/31 suites green in the CI image, checks.yml's exact command, purged
tree, `:ro`. Ten mutations, NO survivors, each on its own `cp -a` of the tree so
habit 18's revert hazard is closed by construction - table in
`DECISIONS/TEL-11-pv-production.md` §7 with byte deltas and sha256s.
⚠️ THIS IS A RUNTIME CHANGE BEHIND AN UNCHANGED VERSION, AND
`tools/predeploy_check.py` WILL REFUSE IT. `app/`, `config.yaml` and
`translations/` are all in its `RUNTIME` tuple and `config.yaml` still reads
0.10.1, so the gate reports a NO-OP deploy until a version is cut. That is PKG's
call and this card does not take it.
No CHANGELOG section: `test_version_gate.py` 11b refuses a newest `## ` heading
that is not config.yaml's `version:`, and opening one would mean taking that
same packaging decision. The operator account is in DOCS.md.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
|
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
b6c6da31d8 |
TEL-10: two sentences that named assertions this file does not make
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m57s
Both are review findings on the merged-in-spirit branch, and neither is in executable code. R6 - test_mqtt.py part 1's headline said "every one of release/1.0's NINE messages is still byte-identical and still first". The assertion under it is `announce(...)[:len(BASELINE) - 1] == BASELINE[:-1]`, which covers EIGHT: the ninth, `goodwe_ctl/availability`, is byte-identical but deliberately moves to last, so a prefix comparison cannot include it. Nothing was unguarded - the `== SITE_NOW` on the next check pins it in its new position - but the sentence was not the check. Part 3 carried the same mis-statement two lines from a check that IS about all nine, and is corrected the same way. R5 - M7's red count was decoration. Re-driven in the CI image on a `cp -a` of the tree, purged, `:ro`, one file at a time, it is 10 reds in test_mqtt.py and not 8, on this tree and on SAFETY-48's alike. The direction was right; the number was inherited rather than re-measured, which is MUTATION.md's reporting rule 3. A note beside the table now says that a red count is a property of the SUITE as much as of the mutation and therefore has to name a tree. Verified: the full suite in the CI image, purged tree, `:ro` mount, one file at a time, exactly the command in .gitea/workflows/checks.yml - 30/30, exit 0. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
b548525d10 |
TEL-10: the loop's integrator stops being invisible
`self.i_w` has been a separate quantity from the command since SAFETY-04 and has left the process nowhere at all - no entity, no MQTT attribute, no log line. The investigation behind SAFETY-48 could only RECONSTRUCT it from the grid trace plus a replay; the reconstruction reproduced about a third of the engagements it was checked against and was discarded, so the card it was gathered for had to be argued from a measurement nobody could stand behind. It could not have been made to work either: `i_w` depends on every cycle before it, including the ones where the arbiter overrode the loop and `main.py` re-seeded `self.i_w = self.target`, and that re-seed is invisible in the grid trace. THREE SITE ROWS, APPENDED AFTER release/1.0's EIGHT. `loop_i` is `Decision.i_w` - the accumulator after the cycle, before the output clamp, the slew limit and quantisation. `loop_lead` is `decision.i_w - prev_w` against the command `compute()` was HANDED, which is not a subtraction of the other two published rows: `Setpoint` is the arbiter's output and is this cycle's, so on any cycle the arbiter overrode the loop the two differ - and that is exactly the cycle on which the integrator was re-seeded. `loop_reason` is `compute()`'s own word; the arbiter's `explain()` prints the winning claim's NAME and has never carried the claim's reason, so `slew-limited` appears in neither the `Why` row nor `Controller status`. Measured on the same cycle: arbiter `'loop -> -5000 W'`, loop `'i-clamped'`. NOTHING IN THE CONTROL PATH MOVED. `app/control.py` is not in this diff. `compute()`, its returned `Decision` and every constant it reads are identical to release/1.0, and all nine of release/1.0's retained discovery messages are byte-identical and still FIRST in the announcement. Evidence: 30/30 suites green in the CI image. Nine mutations, ONE survivor, reported as one: `decision.i_w - self.target` for the lead is +2 B and green because `cycle()` has not reassigned `self.target` at that line - the name is kept for the coupling, not for a behaviour it buys, and M2b (+8 B) is the mutation that does change the value and is red. AND TWO OF THIS CARD'S OWN CHECKS COULD NOT REACH THE FAILURE THEY NAMED. "the published integrator reaches its bound" was GREEN under the card's named mutation (publish `prev_w`, -3 B), because the command reaches the bound too - twelve cycles later. It asserts the LEAD TIME now and is red on 5. "a stopped controller publishes not-running" was GREEN under deleting that branch's assignments (-45 B, -67 B), because the fixture STARTED stopped and `__init__` writes the same values; it stops the controller part-way through a run that has already wound the integrator to -5000 W. Both are MUTATION.md habit 4, found by the battery rather than by review. No CHANGELOG section: `test_version_gate.py` 11b refuses a newest `## ` heading that is not config.yaml's `version:`, and opening one would mean taking a packaging decision this card does not get to take. The operator account is in DOCS.md and the release note belongs to the next PKG ticket. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
26c5ee8adc |
TEL-07: a second MQTT device for inverter B, and A keeps the one it has
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m58s
MQTT discovery announced ONE device and hung every entity off one unique_id prefix, so at two inverters B's per-unit telemetry had nowhere to go. It has somewhere now, and not one entity that already exists moved. ⚠️ THE ASYMMETRY IS DELIBERATE. The first roster entry's per-unit rows are announced on THE DEVICE IT ALREADY HAS; every later entry gets its own device, via_device the controller. "One device per inverter" is tidier and is the change that renames every entity on the live install - and because HA keeps the id it composed at FIRST discovery, a rename produces a NEW entity beside a DEAD one: the history stays behind and every dashboard, template and automation naming it goes on pointing at a sensor that quietly stopped updating, including the three live watchdog automations. The composed ids come out symmetric anyway (sensor.goodwe_inverter_a_battery_power / ..._inverter_b_...), so the tidy design's only real benefit is bought here without its cost. * four per-unit rows - setpoint, battery power, SoC, SAFETY-02 sign latch - announced only from a roster of two. At N=1 nothing is announced and nothing is published: no second device, no renamed entity, no added topic. * grid and p1_sample_age_s stay SITE-scoped and are announced ONCE, at every roster length 1-6. One P1, one grid connection, and p1_sample_age_s is a watchdog input - a second copy is a second answer to "is the meter fresh?". * inverter.roster_names() is the one answer to what the units are called, read by build_roster() and by the publisher, which must know the roster before a Controller exists because announcing happens on the CONNACK. * DECISIONS/TEL-07-second-mqtt-device.md records the two designs side by side. VERIFIED BY DIFFING THE ANNOUNCED PAYLOADS, not by reading the code. The release/1.0 baseline in test_mqtt.py was generated by running that commit's module, not transcribed. Roster of one: 9 topics, 0 missing, 0 changed, 0 added. Roster of two: 0 missing, 0 changed, 8 added. MEASURED, NOT ASSERTED. Sixteen mutations through tools/mutation_run.sh; twelve are in the file as a running table, each named with the property it breaks. Three of those properties exist because the table found their ABSENCE - dropping the unit from the state topic, moving `grid` into the per-unit set, and `units=()` in main()'s publisher call were all GREEN on the first run, as was a roster fallback naming two nameless entries `inverter-a`. Part 9 enumerates what the file still cannot see, with sizes. ⚠️ INVERTER B DOES NOT PHYSICALLY EXIST (~2026-09-12). Every roster of two here is SIMULATED, from the datasheet and serial in NOTES.md §1.1b. Nothing about B has been measured and no entity described here has been seen on a broker. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |