More fully integrate Vue 3 into instructions

[natevw]

Okay, the main goal of this was to integrate Vue 3 setup as an officially supported platform (after #362 recently landed; and see #367 for some initial discussion of the situation).

I ended up going perhaps a bit too eager-beaver, and hope this isn't too disruptive or too hard to review. In broad strokes:

• added a section about Vue 3 hookup
• added details about Vue 3 configuration differences
• split out a copy of some "complete" example files, one for each of Vue 2 and Vue 3
• the examples also now use a substitution block for circuit labelling (HT to https://fuzznotes.com/posts/flash-emporia-vue-3-with-esphome/ for the idea)

And I also re-worked the order of the sections. Rationale being imo (but completely open to pushback) it's easier both as far as keeping the flow of the writeup a little simpler, and just for users with the device on the bench, to start with a plain ESPHome "stub" and then worry about all the detailed Emporia-specific confifguration later using OTA.

I tried to keep ± all the original little tips and notes from the README but many got reshuffled and I probably ended up tweaking wordings and stuff for flow in their new homes. Again, apologies if this ended up overly ambitious, or more specifically sorry that this is probably a lot to review all at once!

My proposal, if there's no major regressions or pushback, might be to merge this for now as hopefully a step forward? But also open to basically just leaving this as a reference if (ideally maybe smaller separate if I can 🤞) changes proposed over on the new docs repo?

[flaviut]

By coincidence, I actually started work migrating the README to a real website yesterday, over at https://emporia-vue-local.github.io/, source code at https://github.com/emporia-vue-local/emporia-vue-local.github.io/tree/main.

At this point, I just have a rough AI-generated outline, which I'm not attached to at all, and a homepage. I'll try and copy over as much content from the README as I can tonight, but I'll go ahead and add you as a collaborator so that I would not be a blocker in case you are interested in working on that.

[natevw]

Oh good timing! (Or it was until I didn't check my GH notifications for a couple days… 😇)

Might be easiest for me to keep typing up in the README on this branch, but will start shifting at least mentally to the new format. Which I like the structure, btw! Felt like the content was already long before I started adding even more to it. Breaking it up into pages seems great 👍

LMK if any concerns with the plan to kinda just keep plowing ahead on this PR for now. IIRC was kinda on the homestretch before I had to switch back to other stuff this week and don't want to slow your project up.

[flaviut]

Go ahead! Moving paragraphs around is a lot easier than writing and testing new material!

[natevw]

Okay I think I need to go pencils-down on this so I don't just start endlessly tweaking. Especially here in this README format as I think the web version will be better for this content. I'll update the main PR notes above with stuff for reviewer and then (if acceptable) possibly merge for now while the site gets built out?

[flaviut]

Alright! The website is now live, using a good chunk of your work from this PR. Thank you so much!

If you have any feedback or would like to see any of it edited, please let me know!

[joerocklin]

I used the information from this PR a couple of weeks ago to get my system up and running, so I want to say a big 'Thank You!' for making this available!

I did add a couple of filters to make some actions a little easier:

  - &zero
    # set any negative values to zero
    lambda: 'return 0.0;'
  - &multiply2
    # multiply the value by 2
    lambda: 'return x * 2.0f;'

My branch circuits are a bit of a mess (thanks previous owner) so I was slowly adding clamps and updating the configuration. Being able to force a given sensor to 'zero' helped keep the noise down. It may not be useful in the long-run though.

The multiply2 filter was useful for the balanced 240V circuits. Although, now I see there is the multiply: 2 syntax that I probably could have used. So, anyone coming back along this comment can know that there's more than one way to do it :)