Don't get me wrong. Indigo's flexibility, and its Python integration "abilities," is what I most brag about when describing Indigo to others. I'm doing some amazing things with Indigo and Python that I am quite sure rivals or exceeds any other HA software's capability. And I too have taken on my HA programming as a most enjoyable hobby. But having to "fix" broken code is the least enjoyable aspect of that hobby (for me) . First AppleScript, then Python, and now plug-ins.
I only meant to caution others about something I was blissfully unaware of when I first started exploring scripting and plug-ins. That scripts and plug-ins can go away on a "moment's" notice, and that you'll either lose capabilities to which you've become accustomed, or you'll have to spend what might be a significant amount of effort to get that capability back. And, for me at least, the nature of HA development is a more than a little addictive, to the point where my simple four-device X-10 lighting control has grown into monster with tentacles wrapped around every aspect of how my house functions.
I understand all the reasons for the decisions Matt and Jay have made over the years for moving on from AppleScript and Python 2, etc. I wasn't pointing fingers, and they or any of us don't need to defend those decisions. But it doesn't change the fact that pushing Indigo past the usefulness of just turning lights on and off comes at a cost. And I never really considered that before I got into scripting and plug-ins. The only thing I can suggest that Indigo could maybe do a better job at is cautioning about this phenomenon somewhere, some how. Is that their job? Maybe. I only meant to ask them to consider it (or some other solution to this dilemma). As we all know: with great power comes great responsibility!
Yes, my HA's core functionality has been rock solid, due to Matt's and Jay's care and attention. I don't think I've ever used a more stable, virtually bug-free piece of software. Kudos to them for that. And the notion that other Indigo users can and do share their work with us makes for a great community effort, and a better product, a better HA experience. I fully support the way Indigo has encouraged and has provided for that. But I would argue that my plugin dependencies, somewhere along the way, morphed from cool convenience to "necessity," and losing them is a bigger deal for me than maybe it is for others.
For example, I start my day and plan my week based on weather. The details of which are staring me in the face as I open my eyes each morning, courtesy of an always-on iPad, Indigo, Python and the NOAA+ plug-in. Yah, that's technically a convenience, but it's also become a significant part of my lifestyle. The loss of NOAA+ means I either have to rebuild it, or alter my lifestyle. My only point is: HA, for me, has evolved from hobby to becoming more of a necessity. In the same way that my stove is just a mere "convenience," I could cook my meals in my yard over a small camp fire, but in reality it is a necessity for my lifestyle. I consider my HA system just another appliance in my home. But one I regard a necessity just as I do my kitchen appliances, my laundry machines, my yard and power tools, etc, etc. I don't like fixing and/or replacing Indigo or its "parts" any more than I do any of my other appliances!
So, again, just pointing out that bolting third-party "parts" onto your Indigo "appliance" can compromise your overall experience and quite possibly increase its maintenance "costs."
In the grand scheme of things, elevating anything from convenience to necessity, and expecting it to remain stable, without maintenance or replacement, fovever, is just not realistic, at all. But that doesn't stop me from wishing it so.