Provide unique IDs for Lutron Entities

[cdheiser]

Breaking change

Proposed change

This change adds unique ids for all Lutron entities. This enables users to rename entities, assign rooms, and change the icons. Unique ids are pulled from the configuration in the main repeater, and are thus bound to that repeater.

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:

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.
• 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.

[cdheiser]

@JonGilmore any ideas on moving this PR forward?

[JonGilmore]

LGTM, sorry this fell off my radar to test

[frenck]

I share the concerns raised (unique ID not unique enough on an entity level), however, this is not a problem right now as shown in the responses by the author.

If in the far future this needs changing, migration can be put into place. So, I think for now this is fine 👍

Thanks @cdheiser 👍