Rules DSL: Document new commands

[Nadahar]

This documents the changes that were introduced in openhab/openhab-core#5481.

[netlify]

✅ Thanks for your pull request to the openHAB documentation! The result can be previewed at the URL below (this comment and the preview will be updated if you add more commits).

Built without sensitive environment variables

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	888bc6b
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/openhab-docs-preview/deploys/6a46c27674992d000836a841
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-2728--openhab-docs-preview.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.
🤖 Make changes	Run an agent on this branch

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[rkoshak]

It's certainly not ideal, but when you submit the PR netlify will deploy a preview you can use to see how the changes are rendered.

[Nadahar]

It's certainly not ideal, but when you submit the PR netlify will deploy a preview you can use to see how the changes are rendered.

It's what I've been doing here. I make changes, push and wait for the preview. But, it's a slow process.

I've added more details on the sidebar menu in this preview. Check it out, what do you think? I think it can be hard to find the right section in longer pages.

[Nadahar]

I guess this is ready for review. Please note the first commit that modifies the number of levels on the sidebar menu. I think it's much better with a more detailed menu, but it should be evaluated by others.

All that is here is already in 5.2.0, so ideally this documentation should be a part of the 5.2.0 documentation as well.

[Nadahar]

I don't know who reviews such documentation, my guess is that not too many people are in a position to point of what of this is wrong, if anything.

I'm not in love with using a table to present the methods, it feels a bit "messy", but I couldn't quite find another way that wouldn't make the section much more laborious and loong.

@rkoshak Are you by any chance capable of doing at least a "coarse review" of this?

[Nadahar]

@florian-h05 What must I do to get this looked at? It would be a shame if this didn't make it into 5.2.0, since the functionality is there in 5.2.0.

[rkoshak]

Not a lot to comment on. I worry about the long term maintenance impact of listing the methods of each class but the Extensions need to be documented here anyway so it probably doesn't save much.

[Nadahar]

@florian-h05 What do I have to do to get this looked at/reviewed?

[florian-h05]

I'll have a look at it. It's really a pain that the doc maintainers all seem to be unavailable for months now. I am just looking through the PRs and reviewing and merging stuff ...

[Nadahar]

I'll have a look at it. It's really a pain that the doc maintainers all seem to be unavailable for months now. I am just looking through the PRs and reviewing and merging stuff ...

Yeah, that's really hopeless, especially around a release.

Please note the change I've done to the side menu in this PR. It makes it much more detailed. Some may find it better and others worse, but I think it makes it much easier to find the section you're after.

[Nadahar]

Do I understand it correct that you are the only one with "merge privileges" that actually "maintain" the docs at this time? Are there nobody else that can help?

[florian-h05]

Overall LGTM, only these two comments:

[florian-h05]

Do I understand it correct that you are the only one with "merge privileges" that actually "maintain" the docs at this time?

Yes.

Are there nobody else that can help?

The docs maintainers are unavailable, and Kai is more or less in the same position as me and active across several repos. Probably the time to propose a new model for maintaining the docs ...

[Nadahar]

I've created #2739 for the sidebar depth.

[dilyanpalauzov]

Probably the time to propose a new model for maintaining the docs ...

I propose: if in 66 days there are no objections, the proposed change is integrated.

It can happen that an objection would be that in the future something will change (in core, webui), and afterwards somebody could write documentation that the same operation can be achieved in a neater way. If within the 66 days nobody proposes documentation how to achieve the same in a neater way, then the original proposal is accepted.