LÖVE

Title. Don't often come to the forums, and if I do, I usually just lurk, but figured your input might be nice to have here.

I just realized there's no such thing as a tool that automagically generates Windows and OS X executables from a given .love file. And when you have to make a bunch of those for a bunch of small little things, it can become real tedious real fast to do it all by hand. Sure it isn't hard, but it's not mighty convenient either.

Summer vacation's coming up and I'll be having some free time on my hands. A tool like this sounds like the perfect project to fill a week or so with. I still have some school stuff running, so I can't start just yet, but I figured I'd ask you guys for your input ahead of time.

The way I see it, the tool should be able to automate the steps outlined here, using the user-selected version of LÖVE, for both Windows and OS X executables. Yes, that would include modifying the info.plist for OS X executables.

I'm fairly confident there's a couple people in the audience right now grabbing for their wallets. (Don't worry, it's a joke. Tool will be free.) However, I got a couple of questions for you first:
- Should I bother including LÖVE versions older than 0.8.0?
- Would custom application icon support be a huge deal?
- Would you all be cool with it being a web-based tool? (It would require internet access and uploading your precious .love to a strange server.)
- Anything you want me to keep in mind, implement, or whatever?

Regarding that third question, my personal preference goes to web-based (ie, going to a website, uploading your .love, and downloading whatever executable you wanted, zipped), since I have only very basic knowledge of building executable applications, but am fairly experienced with PHP, know my way around the command line, and have access to a server this could run on, including the bandwidth to support it. But of course, if y'all really want to be able to generate executables when offline as well, I may be willing to buckle down for another learning experience (atop the pile I already have planned for the coming months).

So, this is a thing that will probably be happening. Let me know what you think!
~ Fang

Working with Löve versions older than 0.8.0 is, in my opinion, not necessary. Having support for icons, however, is important. I'd definately prefer to work offline (I can see how people would prefer not to send their commercial games to some strange server) but online works too.

If I could ask for one feature, it's be the ability to export .deb packages for Ubuntu (and similar).

You can reconstruct the .love file from the .exe in minutes if you know what you're doing, I don't think that having to send it to a server is a problem in that regard.

I do think that the fact that you have to first upload everything and then download it again might be an issue, because that's going to take time. For a large game, possibly more time than doing it by hand. It'd be better if it's a tool running on your own disk. Also, if you have to make the .love file yourself that'd take half the use away. And manually uploading all the files to a server would be a little much work maybe.

I wouldn't bother with löve before 0.8 either, and application icons would be pretty cool.

As for features; make sure you can store multiple copies of the game in the same folder without conflicts (version numbers or something) so that it doesn't either complain or override previous installs. It's nice to have all of the older versions of the game as well.
And maybe an option to reverse the proces (like I said at the top?) so that if you ever need the source of the older versions you can just strip it from the .exe, rather than having to keep an extra copy?

Some people have already done something similar to that. I recommend giving a look at the forums before starting. Maybe you can join forces.

Plu, I didn't mean that uploading the .love to a random server would be a problem because people can read your source code, I mean that it could be a problem if people get access to it in general. Like if you have a game in development, and you're not ready to show it to the public just yet it wouldn't be very nice if it leaked just because you uploaded it to some site. Sure, for most small indie devs this isn't really an issue, but it could be and I could see how it would scare people from using tools like this. But then again, nobody forces them to.

Again, my point is that a local client is nicer, but a server based one works too.

T-Bone wrote:Plu, I didn't mean that uploading the .love to a random server would be a problem because people can read your source code, I mean that it could be a problem if people get access to it in general. Like if you have a game in development, and you're not ready to show it to the public just yet it wouldn't be very nice if it leaked just because you uploaded it to some site. Sure, for most small indie devs this isn't really an issue, but it could be and I could see how it would scare people from using tools like this. But then again, nobody forces them to.

Again, my point is that a local client is nicer, but a server based one works too.

I would like to add to that that the extra hassle is also a big deterrent with servers. Especially for people like me who's internet is painfully slow and simply uploading and redownloading a large game can take several minutes, while running a local application can take seconds

Plu, I didn't mean that uploading the .love to a random server would be a problem because people can read your source code, I mean that it could be a problem if people get access to it in general. Like if you have a game in development, and you're not ready to show it to the public just yet it wouldn't be very nice if it leaked just because you uploaded it to some site.

Ah yeah ok, that's actually a valid comment. Hadn't thought of it like that

Thanks for the replies everyone!

T-Bone wrote:I'd definately prefer to work offline (I can see how people would prefer not to send their commercial games to some strange server) but online works too.

Plu wrote:I do think that the fact that you have to first upload everything and then download it again might be an issue, because that's going to take time.

mickeyjm wrote:Especially for people like me who's internet is painfully slow and simply uploading and redownloading a large game can take several minutes, while running a local application can take seconds

All very valid points and concerns. A local application does indeed sound better. I know jack about application development though, let alone cross-platform. Maybe I can tie this in with the "learn C++" item on my to-do list? I'll have to do a bit more research.

T-Bone wrote:Having support for icons, however, is important.

Noted!

T-Bone wrote:If I could ask for one feature, it's be the ability to export .deb packages for Ubuntu (and similar).

I'll have to look into that, but it's certainly a possibility! Though won't portability of those be wobbly at best, even amongst different versions of Ubuntu? (No expert on the subject.)

kikito wrote:Some people have already done something similar to that.

I'll be sure to browse around a bit before starting, then. Thanks for the heads up!

Making a platform independent tool using C++ is a bit of a pain, I'd suggest using Python for something like this. It has a GUI built-in if you want to use that, and it can be very platform independent without much hassle. Python has modules for creating zips, and modifying text files is pretty straightforward too.

.deb's?