This site uses different types of cookies, including analytics and functional cookies (its own and from other sites). To change your cookie settings or find out more, click here. If you continue browsing our website, you accept these cookies.
Per my initial community posting, it seems that in environments where the firewall blocks pip the YXI installation process takes longer than it needs. My experience was 9:15 minutes for a 'simple' custom tool (one dependency wheel included in the YXI).
My 'Idea' is to provide a configuration option to install the YXI files 'offline'. That is, to skip the pip install --upgrade steps, and perhaps specify the --find-links and --no-index options with the pip install -r requirements.txt command. The --no-index option would assume that the developer has included the dependency wheel files in the YXI package. If possible, a second config option to add the path to the dependencies for the --find-links option would help companies that have a central location for storing their dependencies.
I'm only just starting to explore the python and html sdks, but I think this functionality would be really useful for Alteryx tools.
I foresee cases where a custom tool is developed and we want to install it for 20+ users. Rather than having each user manually open and install the file, and troubleshooting for each of them (which could also become challenging if we want to deploy an enhancement to a tool in the future), I'd like a method (preferably via command line) to automatically install a tool for a user without any interaction/input.
This would allow for targeted tool deployment as well as large-scale tool maintenance as custom Python tools mature in the enterprise space.
The Python SDK offers a possiblity to automatically install Python packages throughpipwhen installing using therequirements.txt. Some changes to the virtual environment of the tool might not be covered by this: For example, downloading and configuring language models for spaCy cannot be solved through the requirements.txt alone (similar for training corpora for NLTK).
So, as an idea for future versions of the SDK: Allow us to specify a Python script that is run when a tool is installed. This way we might be able to set up the environment, load additional tools etc.
I have no idea how many people are using the .Net API to build custom tools, but found an issue with its assembly scanning.
It doesnt pick up classes implementing IPlugin in an abstract base class. Can be worked around by moving the interface onto the concrete implementation but think it should pick up any concrete class implementing the IPlugIn regardless of whether on the class itself or a base class.