PackageManager and food4rhino


I have a difference between what I can find in food4rhino and what I can find with the PackageManager command.
The PackageManager command installs the plugins in an unknown folder. and it does not provide any information about it. Except, installed: YES / NO …

If the PackageManager is more obscure than the old process and if less is found than in the old process.
It’s not really helpful.

So how do I know and set the target folder where the plugins are installed.
And do you plan to sync PackageManager with food4rhino?

also: [Request] Add information to Package Manager

There are also now two interfaces for installing plugins, Rhino Options and PackageManger.
Think UX

1 Like

This is a problem, agreed.
Package manager doesn’t recognise plugins already installed in GH which leads to a conflicts.


It’s strange to me that Rhino can detect if my video card drivers can be update, while can’t detect if a Package is…

Hi jmv,

I won’t answer about the folder where the PackageManager installs the plugins nor the information provided as I don’t know much about the PackageManager but I can help with food4Rhino.

Can you give me more information on what difference you see between food4Rhino and the PackageManager?

Some developers choose to publish their plugin only on food4Rhino, others only on the PackageManager, others on both so if you don’t find a plugin on food4Rhino even if it’s Yak that’s because the developer did not want to publish it on food4Rhino.

Bonne journée!


it would be nice if they have the same amount of info!!!
the PackageManager doesn’t show all the informations i see in food4Rhino, Free or not, comments…

food4Rhino is way better!!!

1 Like

Bonjour @cecile,
Thank you for taking the time on this topic

Apart from the lack of information in the PackageManager interface which some users seem to regret.
The difference I mentioned is the choice of modules accessible via these two platforms.

As you indicated, it is the developer’s responsibility to perform two separate tasks for the same module on both platforms.
I don’t see why a developer or a team would want to deprive themselves of a communication channel.

I understand that certain aspects are beyond your fields of action. However, the result is the sum of the set.
Here is what we get:

3 installation systems, automatic installation via RHI files, manual installation via download from food4Rhino and a second automatic installation via PackageManager (which use different folders).
2 search interfaces, food4Rhino and PackageManager (which do not give the same results).
2 module management interfaces, the interface located in the Rhino options and the interface created for the PackageManager.

PakageManager splits into two parts and several interfaces, which for a user, like a developer, is the same thing, managing modules.

cdt, jmv

Bonjour @cecile,

The solution of having a single server and a single interface (ideally with the possibility of configuring the destination directories) for the management of modules, is not possible ?