Force plotAssemblyTypes to always use instantiated assemblies, and al…

[keckler]

This is meant to improve #1998 by allowing the specification of hot versus cold heights in the plots. Additionally, a couple clean ups are implemented:

1. Change plotAssemblyTypes() so that it always operates based on instantiated assemblies. Allowing users to pass in blueprints was making things really messy, and provided absolutely no benefit because blueprints already contain Assembly objects in the first place through blueprints.assemblies.values().
2. The point above means that the plotAssemblyTypes() method signature is changed. That signature is/was pretty ridiculous anyways, so I feel justified in changing it. I updated all calls to that method that I could find.

I would not expect that there are many downstream calls to this plotAssemblyTypes() method. Checking all the projects that I have access to, I found it used in exactly one place (one of my own internal repos).

[keckler]

I am relatively sure that this is working now. I tested it with a simply dummy case, however I am unable to test it with my big model due to some dependency conflicts. I think it is ready for your eyes @john-science

[john-science]

Love it!

1. Can we put something under the 0.5.1 release notes for "bug fixes"?
2. Does this close a ticket we can link to it?
3. Should we close my previous PR on the matter?

[john-science]

Love it

[keckler]

Love it!

1. Can we put something under the 0.5.1 release notes for "bug fixes"?
2. Does this close a ticket we can link to it?
3. Should we close my previous PR on the matter?

1. I added the release note
2. See point (3) below
3. My intention was to merge these changes into your branch (PR Fixing a couple of plots to use initial block height #1998 ). You'll note that I currently have this PR pointed that way and was working off of your branch when I developed this code. If we do that, then I think your PR is already linked to the appropriate ticket (Clashing prints on blueprints pictures #1158 ).

Let me know what you think of that plan.

[john-science]

3. You'll note that I currently have this PR pointed that way and was working off of your branch

Ah! No, I didn't notice that. I just assumed this was pointed at main.

Thanks!