A shared, git-based voting system: has a specific update to a Home Assistant integration, device firmware, app, or Home Assistant itself turned out to be healthy or problematic? Built for ha-update-manager, but usable by anyone.
Important: this is a collected opinion, not a guarantee. A "healthy" verdict means the people who voted so far didn't run into problems, not that an update is guaranteed to be healthy for your specific setup. Be extra careful with safety-relevant devices (locks, alarms, smoke detectors): a community verdict never replaces your own judgment.
"Healthy"/"problematic" is about whether an update works as expected (no bugs, no missed minimum HA version, no accidentally pushed dev build, no unannounced breaking change), not about security or safety in a broader sense.
Open a new issue via the "Cast a vote" form
(direct link). Fill in only the fields
that belong to the category you pick. A GitHub Action processes your vote
automatically: the corresponding file appears under votes/, and the issue
closes with a confirmation.
No account linking beyond a regular GitHub login is needed: this repo requires no fork and no separate app installation on your side.
A verdict is about a specific jump: the version you upgraded from, and the
one you landed on, not just the destination version alone. Going from 0.1.0
to 3.5.2 (possibly skipping several breaking changes along the way) can carry
very different risk than going from 3.5.1 to 3.5.2, even though both land on
the same version -- so both fields are required. You can vote once per person
per exact jump. A second vote on the same jump overwrites your previous one
(its own created_at is preserved, only updated_at moves).
Every file under votes/ is a plain, public JSON file, readable directly via
raw.githubusercontent.com, no account or API rate limit needed. One file per
destination version holds every jump (every distinct from_version) that's
been rated for it, and every voter's own entry within that jump -- see
votes/README.md for the exact structure.
moderation/banned-users.json lists GitHub usernames whose votes are no
longer processed. Only changed by the organization owners, outside the
regular voting flow. Report abuse via a comment on the relevant vote issue
(before it auto-closes) or a new issue against this repo.
config/site.json holds the quorum: the minimum number of healthy votes a
jump needs before it counts as having enough signal to be trusted at scale.
Each jump's own verdict (see votes/README.md) exposes quorum,
quorum_reached, and auto_install_eligible (no problematic votes at all,
and the healthy count has reached quorum) so any consuming tool can decide
for itself whether and how to act on that signal -- this repo only tracks
and exposes the numbers, it doesn't install anything itself.
analysis/voters.json is a repo-wide, automatically kept up to date view
of who's voted, how active they are, and how often their verdict matches
what everyone else independently concluded on the same jump. See
analysis/README.md for the exact shape and how that's worked out. Not
consumed anywhere yet; collected as future inspiration for picking a
trusted voter.
This is a collection of user opinions, not a judgment of a project or its maintainer. Keep any problem report as factual and helpful as possible.