Use zeroconf attributes in elgato

[epenet]

Proposed change

Use zeroconf attributes in elgato

Type of change

• Dependency upgrade
• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New integration (thank you!)
• New feature (which adds functionality to an existing integration)
• Breaking change (fix/feature causing existing functionality to break)
• Code quality improvements to existing code or addition of tests

Additional information

• This PR fixes or closes issue: fixes #
• This PR is related to issue:
• Link to documentation pull request:

Checklist

• The code change is tested and works locally.
• Local tests pass. Your PR cannot be merged unless tests pass
• There is no commented out code in this PR.
• I have followed the development checklist
• The code has been formatted using Black (black --fast homeassistant tests)
• Tests have been added to verify that the new code works.

If user exposed functionality or configuration variables are added/changed:

• Documentation added/updated for www.home-assistant.io

If the code communicates with devices, web services, or third-party tools:

• The manifest file has all fields filled out correctly.
  Updated and included derived files by running: python3 -m script.hassfest.
• New or updated dependencies have been added to requirements_all.txt.
  Updated by running python3 -m script.gen_requirements_all.
• For the updated dependencies - a link to the changelog, or at minimum a diff between library versions is added to the PR description.
• Untested files have been added to .coveragerc.

The integration reached or maintains the following Integration Quality Scale:

• No score or internal
• 🥈 Silver
• 🥇 Gold
• 🏆 Platinum

To help with the load of incoming pull requests:

• I have reviewed two other open pull requests in this repository.

[probot-home-assistant]

Hey there @frenck, mind taking a look at this pull request as it has been labeled with an integration (elgato) you are listed as a code owner for? Thanks!
_{^{(message by CodeOwnersMention)}}

[epenet]

Or maybe it would it be better to use zeroconf.HaServiceInfo ?

Suggested change

	self, discovery_info: DiscoveryInfoType
	self, discovery_info: zeroconf.HaServiceInfo

[epenet]

Actually, it’s unsafe to override a method with a more specific argument type, as it violates the Liskov substitution principle. For return types, it’s unsafe to override a method with a more general return type.

[frenck]

I think we should adjust the upstream method typing for this in a second-round (once all integrations have been adjusted to ZeroconfServiceInfo).

[epenet]

If we want to go ahead with this, why do it in a second pass? If @bdraco agrees, I can adjust async_step_zeroconf right away in config_entries.py. From my initial attempt, we just need to add a cast from ZeroconfServiceInfo to DiscoveryInfoType in the default implementation:

    async def async_step_zeroconf(
        self, discovery_info: ZeroconfServiceInfo
    ) -> data_entry_flow.FlowResult:
        """Handle a flow initialized by Zeroconf discovery."""
        return await self.async_step_discovery(cast(DiscoveryInfoType, discovery_info))

[epenet]

I've just run some extra tests, and I think it might be easier to first change the result type to ZeroconfServiceInfo in config_entries.py, and then finish the "pass" on all the components.
If we do it now, then less code to change to satisfy mypy

I'll prepare a separate PR for this.

[epenet]

PR created #59503

[epenet]

Rebased following the merge of PR 59503

[frenck]

Thanks, @epenet 👍