Max & SCS - 1.6, 1.27 and Mod Backward Compatibility

[piva]

Read Microsoft documentation, UUID based on network card MAC address, current time and additional counter, by MSDN UUID will never ( ) duplicate (if MAC address is unique)

[SiSL]

No, I don't need to read any documentation.

Your argument was "letting people name it because somewhat at somepoint you edited a mod that obviously edited by someone else over SCS's own mats but keep the name same" (naturally) different. That's why editing existing mats are not what modders supposed to do, they need to create their own mats, which number of modders + players + SCS can't possibly "match" another SHA1 EVER in a life time.

Modders were already using 3rd parties, for such things not to happen, we get BT. But using 3rd party tools you claim it will happen, ofcourse, because it is not the right way to do mods.

UUID is also a meaningless numbers and it is not different than SHA1, so what I'm saying it will not be different from very first argument.

Let me ask you this: Have you ever encountered people claiming your mod is buggy and causing crash while it is not, but users fault of "other mods" in real? Yeah, annoying isn't it? Someone claimed "no-def, no-model" , just texture replacement mod made his profile broken other day. It's damn annoying. Yes, SCS probably suffers the same because of "unofficial third party tools, some of them are cracked tools, some of them are unsupported" modders causing game broken at any time of day.

[Komat]

Maybe use UUID for this one?

UUIDs are useless for this purpose, they are designed for something else. If someone encounters two real mat files which have different content and the same CityHash64 hash, we will likely change the naming system back to SHA1.

[50keda]

Just a reminder that Blender should have problem with this:

I mean, material reuse on hashed content will happen when your second scene/mod will have the same effect configured with exactly the same textures loaded and the same position of adjustment sliders set on material configuration panel (I guess, no ideas how this looks like in Blender). If by some means you put some slider position a bit different having nearly the same look of material you had on previous scene (e.g. making some accessory pack with a bundle of possible reusable materials across them), you might get a different has and a different mat file. It's absolutely no problem, but you just don't have your hand on the process. Having an ability to specify target material location (folder) and file name allows your mods to control materials layout. this is more likely for prefab and map modders (a team of) to handle this option rather than for your single-pack truck mod.

Well in Blender this can be easily achieved in at least two ways. Either you have one blend file with all materials that you are using (sth like library) and then just linking them in other blend files. Or your are simply linking it from any blend file

Once material is linked (not append) then you can be sure your materials will ended up with same hash.
Now this is ideal way how to make shared material. So whenever changing original material, you just have to re-export models using this material in other blend files, which is not really a rocket science. Moreover export from BT can be automated with batch script if you have 1000 models which 99% of modders anyway don't have