Remove Dyson integration

[epenet]

Breaking change

Remove Dyson integration

Proposed change

See #46400, #53801

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: Remove Dyson integration home-assistant.io#20231

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.

[Jc2k]

If the dyson_local effort is stalled then I'd like to fix the existing code rather than remove it. I haven't so far because I thought I was stepping on toes. So 👎 on total removal.

[epenet]

Based on your own comment: "I don't think there is a sensible migration path from the old integration to this one."

In my opinion, if it doesn't work at all (and hasn't worked for almost a year), then it should be removed.
That wouldn't prevent it being re-added/re-created later.

[Jc2k]

I meant we can't migrate existing installs. And that's still the case. It's unlikely there are any though because it has been broken for so long. But that's not why I want to save the existing plug-in.

It's a lot of work to get a "new" integration in review wise. This PR is 3k lines of removal. Re-adding it means those 3k lines need re-reviewing. Which will mean breaking in into 6 PRs so people will review it.

Fixing this just needs the web flow code removing and a way to provide the password directly like dyson_local does. That will be a much smaller diff, will be much easier to get through code review.

It will be a breaking change, sure, but it is already broken and every way forward is a breaking change. But i think it's less burdensome.

[pvizeli]

I agree we should remove it. The Dyson local is also not sure if that gets ever merges or is working. People buying devices because we show to support it and quite piss-off and would end a lot cheaper and better to use some Xioma product instead. Dyson will not that it works and it ends up in an endless cat/mouse game. @frenck @MartinHjelmare ?

[frenck]

I agree on the removal and thus will approve it. It has been broken for over a year, and no effort has been made by anyone to address it in any way.

As long as it is here, it will make people think it works. Which is false.

I rather do long reviews to see a working and fresher implementation in the future.