This a lot of eye opening stuff here.
Will have to look into all that a bit further.
Thanks again,
Evan
What % of firms with PyRevit do you think do this, or are willing to do this? Now whatever you think that was divide by two. And again. Now we might be in the ballpark. Sadly far too many aren’t going to that extent (otherwise IronPython2 installs in 2025 would be near nil).
Also I am told that most of the samples (what many are after) stop working, as does most of the UI features that people make use of (similar issues to the Datashapes above.
Sure anything can be done because it is open source, but most aren’t willing / able to put in the effort.
I am hopeful that they’ll be able to port over the recent PythonNet tooling soon, which will enable a lot of what is requiring they keep IP2 in there. But the Autodesk team has to incorporate and provide access to the engine under an open source license first. All things in time, hopefully faster than we have seen of late (again Python2 was EOL in 2020…)
So, if I am hearing this correctly: the safest bet is to utilize Dynamo Player to run lean-Dynamo plugins with the option of utilizing Python Nodes that utilize CPython framework (utilizing third party packages that don’t have ironPython dependency) OR full .NET framework plugins that have their own UI tools in place?
Clarifying question: PyRevit utilizes IronPython therefore utilizing that add-on to ribbon your plugins opens you up to the same problems as using third-party packages like Data-Shapes that utilize IronPython? Or as well, utilizing PyRevit module in .py script opens you up to similar problem because pyrevit modules utilizes in some shape or form IronPython?
Thanks again,
Evan
To add, if you go with the .NET route, starting from 2025, it will no longer be .NET Framework but .NET Core.
IronPython 2. IronPython 3 is an option and fine.
Yes, or zero touch based Dynamo nodes which are also built on C#.
Yes, but the issue is IronPython2.