Feature Request

fantasma_oskar

When renaming a Slot with an already existing name, it would be incredibly helpful to add the option to "switch" the names between them. E.g
We have SLOT_1 and SLOT_2.
I want to rename SLOT_1 to SLOT_2, but there is a clash. A simple popup suggesting to switch their slot names with eachother (swap) or input first name and then edit the second one.

Misaki

fantasma_oskar Thank you very much for sharing this idea.
I agree that the concept of offering a direct “name switch” option when two slot names collide is quite interesting and could be convenient in certain cases.

However, after considering how this would work internally, it appears that implementing such a feature in a completely safe manner would be challenging.
Even if we were to add a switch function, the editor would still need to perform a sequence of operations such as temporarily assigning an intermediate name, renaming the second slot, and then restoring the intended name. Ensuring that this process remains fully consistent with all references—such as skins, attachments, and any other dependencies—would require additional safeguards.

Because of this, the risks involved in automating the operation may outweigh the actual benefit, and performing the steps manually remains the safest and most predictable approach for now.

That said, we appreciate the suggestion, and it is helpful for us to hear how these workflows could be improved. If you have any other ideas or use cases you would like us to consider, please feel free to share them.

Spinebot

That's an interesting feature request! Having an automatic name swap option when there's a naming conflict between slots would definitely streamline the renaming workflow, especially when you need to reorganize slot names or reorder their purposes.

Currently, when you encounter this situation, you'd need to:

Rename one slot to a temporary name
Rename the other slot to your desired name
Rename the first slot back to complete the swap

A popup dialog offering to automatically swap the names would save these extra steps and make the process much more efficient.

fantasma_oskar

Hey Misaki!
Thanks for the quick turnaround!

For the temporary name, a uuid as prefix / suffix should work. With a lookup before applying the changes in the off chance there is a uuid clash for some reason.
I just assume this would be treated as a command which could be reverted in case there are any errors.
But I don't have insight into the inner workings of Spine so there are probably limitations I am unaware of.
Current pain point is mostly related to BONES and SLOTS. Maybe it could be limited to those? 🙂

Nate

Such juggling isn't technically super difficult. The only problem is how to make it clear in the UI what is happening.

I understand you go to rename a slot, it says no, the name is already used. So you have to cancel, go find it, rename it, then find your first slot (page down) and rename it like you wanted in the first place. That is indeed a pretty terrible workflow and we could think about how to improve it.

It's not necessarily a "name swap". It might be confusing to give the conflicting item the old name of the just renamed item.

Maybe instead of the "this name is in use" dialog, when you try to set the name and there's a conflict, the rename dialog changes to show 1) the item you are renaming, and 2) the other item that has a conflicting name. each has a textbox that contains the same name, allowing you to set both names at once.

I've never seen other software do this, though that doesn't mean it's a bad idea necessarily. We just need to be sure it's not confusing:

Name: _____________
[cancel][ok]

Then:

Name: _____________
A slot with that name already exists:
Name: _____________
[cancel][ok]

I'm not sure it's immediately apparent the dialog is renaming both. 🤔

Misaki

In addition to the UI challenges already mentioned, I think the following situation also illustrates the difficulty of presenting this behavior clearly to users.

For example, imagine attempting to name an item Bone1 and being told that the name already exists. You might then decide to rename the existing Bone1 to Bone2 so that you can use Bone1 for the new item. However, when you press OK, another dialog appears stating that Bone2 is also already taken.

Depending on the project, this can lead to a sequence of repeated “name already exists” dialogs.
Another point of concern is that the tree view cannot be scrolled while the name-conflict dialog is open, making it difficult for the user to see how far this renaming process needs to continue. I imagine this might lead to some confusion in certain situations.

fantasma_oskar

@Nate Yeah, that is exactly the issue we are facing. A long way up and down the hierarchy for swapping a _1 and a _2.
Having the name of both items shown at the same time seems like a good solution! It would solve most issues and let it be done in one go. 🙂 (possibly with a extra cool "Swap names?" button for convenience)

@Misaki
For sure, but it could check the validity of the new names on changes in either box. 🙂 Instead of a chain-popping.
Checking for a match in other "items" shouldn't be a computationally heavy function.

**Rename**
Name: _____________
[cancel][ok]

**Rename**
Name: _____________
A slot with that name already exists:
Name: _____________
[cancel][ok]       [swap names?]

3 (name clash for new input)

**Rename** (with new clashing suggestion)
Name: _____________
A slot with that name already exists:
Name: **SOME_SLOT_2** (already exists, please change)
[cancel][ok]       [swap names?]