The request body format looks the same, so I wonder what the difference is. Besides I tried the following steps
setZone (master M, slave S1)
setZone (master M, slave S2)
and the result was: master M was happily adding S2 to its zone, now consisting of S1 and S2.
Maybe addZoneSlave is outdated or I am missing something?
Turns out, you're totally right. You can just use /setZone to add to existing groups; technically, the master will then itself send an /addZoneSlave command to the intended new device to actually make the addition, but it working only with /setZone can make the process simpler. I'm going to look into updating our documentation to make this clearer.
And for additional clarity: for anyone using /addZoneSlave, have no fear, support for that endpoint is not changing and you won't need to make any changes to your app to use /setZone instead.
Thanks Groucho for raising this question and helping us improve our documentation (I know this is the second time you've helped us out in this way)!
Comments
The request body format looks the same, so I wonder what the difference is. Besides I tried the following steps
and the result was: master M was happily adding S2 to its zone, now consisting of S1 and S2.
Maybe addZoneSlave is outdated or I am missing something?
Hi Groucho,
Turns out, you're totally right. You can just use /setZone to add to existing groups; technically, the master will then itself send an /addZoneSlave command to the intended new device to actually make the addition, but it working only with /setZone can make the process simpler. I'm going to look into updating our documentation to make this clearer.
And for additional clarity: for anyone using /addZoneSlave, have no fear, support for that endpoint is not changing and you won't need to make any changes to your app to use /setZone instead.
Thanks Groucho for raising this question and helping us improve our documentation (I know this is the second time you've helped us out in this way)!
Fine! Thanks for your quick reply.