Add exception for dynamic devices quality scale rule

[joostlek]

Proposed change

Okay so after this rule has been added, we have seen a couple of integrations where we think its not reasonable to enforce this rule. I am not 100% yet on the wording so I would love some feedback on this one. To give some examples and reasoning behind them, I will add some examples so we can also discuss those.

• Philips hue
  • While someone does not add a new light every day or week, or maybe after someone has their whole house filled with hue it won't happen anymore at all. I do think that we should enforce the rule here, since it works locally and the origin of purchase generally is a small one.
• Homewizard
  • So a friend recently went from 1 phase to 3 phases, and after that was completed the integration didn't work. turned out that his instance was running on an UPS. The integration expected the power in the whole house to go down during this maintenance and thus be rebooted once finished. I think this makes sense, but in this case, if possible, it would be nice to detect this and reload the integration automatically. (also keeping in mind batteries are getting more popular and thus this could happen more often).
• Renault
  • So what I understand from @epenet is that this involves a rate limit. So polling the list of all the cars every hour (?) would have an impact on the amount of requests that we can do for the rest of the integration. Since changing a car is quite a big purchase and doesn't happen often for the majority of households, I think we can exempt it.

Type of change

• Document existing features within Home Assistant
• Document new or changing features for which there is an existing pull request elsewhere
• Spelling or grammatical corrections, or rewording for improved clarity
• Changes to the backend of this documentation
• Remove stale or deprecated documentation

Checklist

• I have read and followed the documentation guidelines.
• I have verified that my changes render correctly in the documentation.

Additional information

• This PR fixes or closes issue: fixes #
• Link to relevant existing code or pull request:

[epenet]

I'm not sure of the wording either - but I approve 😄

[emontnemery]

We discussed this in the core meeting, and the conclusion is that it's OK to reload the integration when detecting a rare occurrence, but not OK to not detect it at all.

This means the third example (Renault) in the PR description is not valid.