Skip to content

Conversation

@Meierschlumpf
Copy link
Member

@Meierschlumpf Meierschlumpf commented Oct 15, 2025


Homarr

Thank you for your contribution. Please ensure that your pull request meets the following pull request:

image

Closes #2645

@Meierschlumpf Meierschlumpf self-assigned this Oct 15, 2025
@Meierschlumpf Meierschlumpf added enhancement New feature or request integration New integration labels Oct 15, 2025
@deepsource-io
Copy link
Contributor

deepsource-io bot commented Oct 15, 2025

Here's the code health analysis summary for commits 6f3b7ec..2228726. View details on DeepSource ↗.

Analysis Summary

AnalyzerStatusSummaryLink
DeepSource JavaScript LogoJavaScript✅ SuccessView Check ↗

💡 If you’re a repository administrator, you can configure the quality gates from the settings.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 15, 2025

Coverage Report

Status Category Percentage Covered / Total
🔵 Lines 25.06% 14958 / 59673
🔵 Statements 25.06% 14958 / 59673
🔵 Functions 36.67% 706 / 1925
🔵 Branches 72.33% 1697 / 2346
File Coverage
File Stmts Branches Functions Lines Uncovered Lines
Changed Files
packages/api/src/middlewares/integration.ts 16.54% 100% 66.66% 16.54% 32-77, 96-140, 153-190
packages/api/src/router/widgets/index.ts 100% 100% 100% 100%
packages/api/src/router/widgets/system-usage.ts 58.53% 100% 100% 58.53% 18-20, 26-28, 34-47
packages/common/src/errors/http/handlers/index.ts 100% 100% 100% 100%
packages/common/src/errors/http/handlers/pocketbase-http-error-handler.ts 91.3% 40% 100% 91.3% 21-22
packages/cron-jobs/src/index.ts 100% 100% 100% 100%
packages/cron-jobs/src/jobs/integrations/system-usage.ts 100% 100% 0% 100%
packages/definitions/src/integration.ts 98.58% 100% 33.33% 98.58% 339, 342, 345-347
packages/definitions/src/widget.ts 100% 100% 100% 100%
packages/integrations/src/types.ts 100% 100% 100% 100%
packages/integrations/src/base/creator.ts 86.17% 100% 0% 86.17% 45-61
packages/integrations/src/base/errors/http/index.ts 100% 100% 100% 100%
packages/integrations/src/beszel/beszel-integration.ts 100% 60% 100% 100%
packages/integrations/src/interfaces/system-usage/system-usage-integration.ts 0% 0% 0% 0%
packages/integrations/src/interfaces/system-usage/system-usage-types.ts 0% 0% 0% 0%
packages/integrations/src/mock/mock-integration.ts 46.66% 100% 33.33% 46.66% 67-70, 76-133
packages/integrations/src/mock/data/system-usage.ts 11.42% 100% 0% 11.42% 6-10, 12-37
packages/request-handler/src/system-usage.ts 75% 100% 0% 75% 15-17
packages/ui/src/icons/index.ts 0% 0% 0% 0% 1-57
packages/widgets/src/index.tsx 71.42% 100% 0% 71.42% 88-104, 119-132
packages/widgets/src/options.ts 96.33% 76.31% 100% 96.33% 134-137
packages/widgets/src/_inputs/common.tsx 0% 100% 100% 0% 2-30
packages/widgets/src/_inputs/index.ts 0% 100% 100% 0% 2-32
packages/widgets/src/_inputs/widget-dynamic-select-input.tsx 0% 100% 100% 0% 3-71
packages/widgets/src/_inputs/widget-select-input.tsx 0% 100% 100% 0% 3-72
packages/widgets/src/modals/widget-edit-modal.tsx 0% 100% 100% 0% 3-161
packages/widgets/src/system-usage/component.tsx 0% 100% 100% 0% 4-170
packages/widgets/src/system-usage/index.ts 64.86% 100% 33.33% 64.86% 17-30
packages/widgets/src/system-usage/item.tsx 0% 100% 100% 0% 2-41
packages/widgets/src/system-usage/errors/no-system-selected-error.ts 0% 0% 0% 0% 1-19
Generated in workflow #9037 for commit 2228726 by the Vitest Coverage Report Action

@Meierschlumpf Meierschlumpf marked this pull request as ready for review October 25, 2025 10:38
@Meierschlumpf Meierschlumpf requested a review from a team as a code owner October 25, 2025 10:38
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Once again, I'm not sure whether it makes sense to add a new widget, router and handler for this, since everything is so similar with the existing ones.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What would be your suggestion instead?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I mean the widget shows similar data to system-resources and health-monitoring. But at the same time it shows other data as well and it also has an option to choose a system

Copy link
Member

@manuel-rw manuel-rw Oct 31, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I mean the widget shows similar data to system-resources and health-monitoring. But at the same time it shows other data as well and it also has an option to choose a system

To decide that, we need to know the differences between them.
What other data does it show? Remember, we can keep this new widget and make it compatible for Dash., TrueNAS, ...etc.

What would be your suggestion instead?

Since Hardware monitoring will be one of the main use cases of Homarr in general, I think we should add your new widget to the existing hardware monitoring category and then update that category to display additional information if available (e.g. by Bazel). That is more work, but better for the user, since they can choose any of the widgets and less confusing (why would the Bezel widget not be compatible with Dash. and the other way around? Why does the new widget not have "Bezel" in it's name if it's only strictly compatible with said app?)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree that it and the others should be available in all 3 widgets if possible, however the structure of all 3 is quite different. Especially the heal monitoring which distinguishes between different drives etc.

This widget only has the percentage usage and additional infos that are not on the system health monitoring widget like network usage and the agent it is using. Also it shows the name of the system directly.

Do you think it makes more sense to not merge this today and discuss how we move forward further or that we release it today and if necessary change it (for example using a migration script) in an upcoming release?

I think the people would be quite happy with the addition and we can still improve it in upcoming releases

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh wait we are back in normal time, true 😂
Release was just now

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

enhancement New feature or request integration New integration

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

feat: beszel integration

3 participants