I don't think this is being stated clearly by either side. If you have access to the latest direct HOMEWEATHERSTATION support in MeteoBridge software, and choose to use it instead of manually defining an HTTP action you will be faced with the following possibilities, without judging how likely they are:
- The HWS API never needs to change. All will be well, no matter what approach you took.
- The API needs to change, and thus you might update HWS. You will then also have to upgrade your HTTP action accordingly (if you went that route), or wait for Boris to update MB to reflect the necessary change in direct support. Both are possible, but in the second scenario there is one extra dependency besides yourself, which might be perfectly acceptable.
- If you chose the direct option, are happy with it, and the API changes happen a certain time after today, long enough for your "maintenance support to have expired" (2 years at worst, but sooner for some that licensed MB before May 1, but no more than 2 years ago), you will not get the updated "direct" support, unless you pay first, or switch to the HTTP method at that point. If you chose the HTTP route you will still be able to control things and fix it yourself.
For relatively new licensees to MeteoBridge, only the second point is relevant at the moment, and plays no role if you agree with the 2 year renewal requirement, and plan to use it when the time comes. For legacy licensees, who were not expecting this 2 year renewal requirement to ever come up, and if you are not interested in new features, but only bug fixes (which this might be an example of), and you do not want to pay (now, or later), you should be choosing the HTTP route.
I think all of this is fair in light of a clear documentation on MB's side that while your license itself will be perpetual, updates (of any kind) will not be available after 2 years, unless you pay up for another 2 years. For legacy users, this documentation never existed, and the practical side was that updates were constantly made available. It is not unreasonable for such users to have expected bug fixes to continue to be made available, but not reasonable per se to expect new features for free.
So, what about this HWS direct support feature (and that's what it is, a new feature). As Boris mentioned in an earlier post, it is a convenience only, because you can still do it directly through HTTP. For some, the additional dependency might also be a downside. For me, this new feature is not worth the 2 year fee, in particular since I already have the HTTP method up and running and I have no other reason (currently). For others, you may already have access, but might loose it at some point. So, choose either approach above according to your situation, and willingness to pay up after 2 years.
