I would like to request approval for additional plugs as part of merging two existing snaps into a single package.
Background
Simple Hub, previously known as CyBear Jinni, is an open-source smart home system designed to control devices from different vendors (similar to Home Assistant and OpenHAB).
Currently, users need to install two separate snaps for different functionalities:
cbj-hub (in the process of being renamed to simple-hub) β The main hub responsible for device control.
security-bear β Ensures that devices remain accessible even after a Wi-Fi change, which is crucial for headless setups like Raspberry Pi.
Users also had to manually install additional packages like Node-RED and Mosquitto (MQTT broker) to complete their setup. To simplify the deployment process, we have decided to consolidate all required components into a single snap.
Request
As part of merging security-bear into cbj-hub (soon simple-hub), I request approval to include the following missing plugs in cbj-hub/simple-hub:
network-manager β Required to manage network configurations and handle connectivity changes.
network-observe β Needed for monitoring network status to ensure devices remain accessible after network changes.
These plugs are already part of security-bear, and their inclusion in cbj-hub/simple-hub will ensure a seamless user experience.
Please let me know if any additional information or justifications are required.
+2 for, 0 against grating simple-hub (former cbj-hub) auto-connection to network-manager and network-observe interfaces.
We will proceed to grant the requested auto-connections as soon as a new snap revision declaring the use of those interfaces will be uploaded to the store
Revisions in development mode cannot be released to stable or candidate channels.
You can read more about [`devmode` confinement](https://snapcraft.io/docs/snap-confinement) and [`devel` grade](https://snapcraft.io/docs/snapcraft-yaml-reference).
even though I am using grade: stable, confinement: strict
Is it connected to this request?, I canβt seem to promote it even to edge.
Noup. It only needs manual review if/when the security context changes (i.e. new interfaces are required). Otherwise, newer versions should pass automatic review cleanly
Iβm manually approving this armhf revision. However, you should work to resolve the executable stack issue reported by the automatic review as it will block subsequent releases until it is fixed.