Enable new registry rename for Insteon

[wonderslug]

## Description:

This is a simple change to the InsteonEntity what supports the unique_id property in order to allow renames with the new entity registry.

Currently the name returns a unique name thats used for the entity_id. This is just being called now by the unique_id property in order to allow for the registry to support the rename configuration options.

Related issue (if applicable): fixes #17170

Pull request in home-assistant.io with documentation (if applicable): None

Checklist:

• The code change is tested and works locally.
• Local tests pass with tox. Your PR cannot be merged unless tests pass

If user exposed functionality or configuration variables are added/changed: None Needed

If the code communicates with devices, web services, or third-party tools: None Needed

If the code does not interact with devices:

• Tests have been added to verify that the new code works.

[homeassistant]

Hi @wonderslug,

It seems you haven't yet signed a CLA. Please do so here.

Once you do that we will be able to review and accept this pull request.

Thanks!

[wonderslug]

Closing for Re-Run of CI after Error (not failure)

[wonderslug]

Reopen for Re-Run of CI after Error (not failure)

[balloob]

This is weird, we should just remove self.name as it's confusing for users and move the definition to unique_id property. Don't we have access to a real name for the name property?

[wonderslug]

From an Insteon stand point name gets the underlying device id with group for multi referenced nodes (button id or sub device) and is the "real name". It is also unique within an Insteon network and can act as the uinique_id for the registry.

Do the name and unique_id need to be different?

[wonderslug]

Maybe we can get a device description, model, and Insteon address kinda like zwave does for its nodes.

So name would become something like
"Keypad Dimmer 2334-222 291abb_2",
"I/O Linc 2450 440f9c"
"Door Sensor 2843-232 21545c"

This ends up looking like this

[wonderslug]

Of note doing this does make a breaking change for entity_ids being different for existing customizations.

[balloob]

We don't need any of those node IDs anymore, once there is unique ID, people can change it. And it will also make sure there is never a collision of IDs, they get reserved.

So name should be the most natural name one can think of. Yes, that will be a breaking change so we should do this in 2 phases: first just introduce the unique ID that is the same as the name which tries to be unique.

Then in a couple of releases, we can drop the name being all weird, because everyone who has upgraded already has their entity ID locked in, making it a non-breaking change.

[balloob]

Still I want to make sure we copy the implementation of name property because I don't trust that in the future someone will jsut change the name, messing with the unique IDs, and now that would suck.

[wonderslug]

Not a problem. Ill make the unique_id distinct from name and ill put up a separate issue and PR as WIP with the phase 2 up.

[wonderslug]

Name changes added to #17194 and PR #17195

[dwradcliffe]

I just came here to file an issue about this. I think this is exactly what I was looking for!