[netatmo] Correct Discovery service

[clinique]

While previous behavior seemed to work, it made the weather station child of a home, being inconsistant with ModuleType description and expected API calls (e.g. calls to measurement channels were broken).

On netatmo side, this dependency exists but is partially reflected in API calls structure, most of them still being based on initial organization (before the introduction of homes for energy and security purpose).

Signed-off-by: clinique gael@lhopital.org

[lolodomo]

LGTM

[lolodomo]

I propose @jlaur or me to test that before merging.

[jlaur]

I propose @jlaur or me to test that before merging.

I didn't previously focus on testing discovery, but I remember you did some testing with findings and are more into the problem, so please go ahead without me. :-)

[lolodomo]

I have my account bridge setup in a configuration file.
Everything is then discovered when I start a discovery but my weather station and its modules are all in doubled.
One with the following UID netatmo:weather-station:compte:0123456789ab is good and when approved, the thing went ONLINE and the hierarchy is OK.
For the other one with the following UID netatmo:weather-station:compte:xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:0123456789ab, if I approve it, the thing remains OFFLINE because it is linked to an unknwon parent netatmo:home:compte:xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

For the home, the camera and the persons, it looks good, I can approve them, the hierarchy is good and they went ONLINE. Nothing is duplicated in the inbox.

If it works for security stuff, it should work too for the weather station.

[lolodomo]

For the other one with the following UID netatmo:weather-station:compte:xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:0123456789ab, if I approve it, the thing remains OFFLINE because it is linked to an unknwon parent netatmo:home:compte:xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

This is certainly the discovery through the homesdata that creates these duplicated things. Wasn't your code trying to filter them ?

[lolodomo]

I will test again with the last version of the code but I believe it will work ;)

[lolodomo]

Code looks good to me and change was tested with success.
Thank you.