Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Change default setting for accept follower actions to false #3053

Closed

Conversation

Navid200
Copy link
Collaborator

@Navid200 Navid200 commented Aug 29, 2023

There are cases where an individual just wants to have someone follow their readings. But, they want to be in charge of everything themselves.

There are also cases where someone wants the follower to be able to enter treatments.

How do we know which group is larger than the other so that we can choose the right default?

Allowing someone to stop your sensor without your knowledge is a very dangerous situation. There are times you may want that to be the case for example if the master is a child who has not mastered using the CGM yet.

1- If you want to stop sensor on your child's phone and cannot, all you need to do is to ask him to enable this setting.

2- If you don't want your follower to be able to accidentally stop your sensor and they do, it will be too late to do anything about it as the sensor will have been stopped already and you cannot undo that.

Comparing those two scenarios, I see the safest default to be false.

@jamorham
Copy link
Collaborator

jamorham commented Sep 8, 2023

Stopping the sensor remotely is only available via voice command. I would prefer to wrap that in engineering mode rather than remove the full two-way sync which xDrip offers by default.

@Navid200
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Navid200 commented Sep 8, 2023

If a parent/partner needs to be able to stop sensor remotely, I don't want to tell them that now, they need to enable engineering mode. So, please let's not put it behind engineering mode.

I didn't know stop sensor remotely was only available through a voice command.
Considering, I see no reason for PR.

Thanks

@Navid200 Navid200 closed this Sep 8, 2023
@Navid200 Navid200 deleted the Navid_2023_08_28 branch September 9, 2023 00:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants