Answered Several plugins of the same type in AddonPackages?

[dreamable]

So as I'm using VaM, my AddonPackages folder grows bigger and bigger, naturally. I wanted to ask a newbie question about whether or not I should keep all of the plugins/.vars with the same name, but different versions?

For example, I have like 10 different versions of AcidBubbles' Timeline in that folder, each with a different version number.
AcidBubbles.Timeline.127.var
AcidBubbles.Timeline.172.var
AcidBubbles.Timeline.200.var
etc...

All the way to 218, which I assume is the latest version. Should I keep the older versions, as some scenes are dependent on them? Or is that not how it works? Perhaps some plugins should be kept, while others are irrelevant? I don't know.

 

[RandomVAMUser]

Scene can require specific version of .var package (due development changes in plugin) instead of just "latest/newest".
Using "latest" version could break some old scenes that where created using older version of plugin (in this example Timeline).

It's "safe" to delete them if you are unsure if you still need them...but then again they are small size.
You can always re-download from HUB if you need specific version for XYZ scene.

 

[ZRSX]

Using "latest" version could break some old scenes that where created using older version of plugin (in this example Timeline).

Yep. Though it's worth noting that some plugins are backward compatible. And it's the case for Timeline: as mentioned here and here.

So for Timeline, you can keep only the latest.
I do so and I totally back up what Acid Bubbles said: no issues even with older scenes.

 

[X6CB1080]

I have a similar question about morphs. Is there a reason these morphs get renamed/added for each creator/look? Why do we need 20 versions of the same morph? It makes it near impossible to organize and add morphs. It seems like when you make a morph a favorite the system makes every morph with the same name a favorite. It seems like there has to be a method of cleaning up redundant files.

 

[TToby]

@X6CB1080 This was a way better some VaM versions ago, with all morphs were automatically being forced to have unique internal names. Than, with the new VAR package file system we now have, it was getting worse again: If somebody is creating a package with a morph in a var file, VaM will automatically add a new version number each time the creator is editing those packages, which obviously will fool the unique-name-system. This is a somewhat known fact and very annoying. To prevent having too many versions shown, there is a option box "only show newest version" or something like that. This will hide the older versions, but does not prevent those double-entries from creators, who have used the same morph with different internal unique name, etc. The system is not perfect.

Long story short: It is indeed annoying, but it won't be fixed in the actual VaM version any more. The creator of VaM is putting all work in the future new version, now. So, unfortunately, we have to live with some of those old oddities.