Loqed integration

[cpolhout]

Proposed change

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: Added documentation for new integration Loqed home-assistant.io#22439

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.

[homeassistant]

Hi @mikewoudenberg,

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!

[cpolhout]

@frenck This is a new PR for the loqed-integration. Based on this PR: #70080
Thanks for reviewing the previous one. To answer your questions from the previous comments:

• Missing tests. We require configuration flows to have 100% test coverage.
• --> There are tests now!
• What if the lock was not on my internal network? E.g., a remote lock at my parents?
  --> First priority, especially for security-reasons, was the local integration. Because thats what a lot of people prefer. Especially when it comes to front-door-locks. Together with the manufacturer I will discuss a remote integration.
• Consider moving data handling using a DataUpdateCoordinator
  --> Done
• How would it handle multiple locks?
  --> Multiple locks are currently separate integrations.

[frenck]

@cpolhout You already have PR #70080 open, why open a new PR?
Please update the existing PR so we can continue the review process there.

Thanks! 👍

../Frenck

[cpolhout]

Updated the previous PR