Lafolie wrote:How about an icon file upload field to add to the exe/app/etc?
Interesting idea, although I think it might have a hint of feature creep.
Having the default LÖVE icon isn't exactly ideal for when you want to distribute a game - and it isn't always clear how to change a program's icon (icns files for OS X, I don't even know how in Windows...).
I agree that too many features are bad though, so another way to do icons would be great.
Hmm... it would mean extra backend work though. Say we could upload a 512x512 png icon, you'd have to then convert it to the icon format of each target platform and 'install' it appropriately.
Do you recognise when the world won't stop for you? Or when the days don't care what you've got to do? When the weight's too tough to lift up, what do you? Don't let them choose for you, that's on you.
I think what I'll do is make a javascript doodad that allows you to add as many icon fields as you want (within reason) so you can upload it in many different sizes, so that it won't have to be resized.
The best part is that I'm not writing the back-end, so this won't be my problem to deal with.
EDIT: (Fixed the spelling mistake as well. But I'm too lazy to upload another version when that's the only difference.)
Hm, it seems there is much interest in icons. Very well. But I doubt it will be in there at first, because it's probably going to be pretty complicated (especially for Windows), and it is non-essential to distributing your game. I very much had quick and small games in mind, where a custom game icon is of lesser importance.
By the way, I don't think it's feasible to build LÖVE on the fly, so that means the service needs quite a bit of hard drive space: all supported versions for all platforms. It adds up fairly quick.
Robin wrote:By the way, I don't think it's feasible to build LÖVE on the fly, so that means the service needs quite a bit of hard drive space: all supported versions for all platforms. It adds up fairly quick.
I don't by "Build" nevon meant compile? (Is this what you were thinking of?) As far as I can see, a copy of the executables would be made, the necessary modifications made to it, and then it would be downloadable by the user.
Also, this would most certainly need to be implemented as a side task, as in, spawned by the request, not part of the request processing. The user would then be notified with a download link by some means.
BlackBulletIV wrote:I don't by "Build" nevon meant compile? (Is this what you were thinking of?)
No, I didn't mean that. I simply meant to raise the issue of disk space.
BlackBulletIV wrote:As far as I can see, a copy of the executables would be made, the necessary modifications made to it, and then it would be downloadable by the user.
Yeah.
BlackBulletIV wrote:Also, this would most certainly need to be implemented as a side task, as in, spawned by the request, not part of the request processing. The user would then be notified with a download link by some means.
Interesting. I think that depends on how long the processing typically takes. Especially for only a single platform, it could be ready within the blink of an eye. Also, congrats on the 700!
