Simple and efficient packaging

[Scott Elcomb]

With turbo mode and 512Mb of memory, things are looking bright. I've
started reading the documentation for node-webkit on a work-related
project and it IMHO looks very well suited to a PINE environment. If
we can build for ARM.

Highly recommend reading these slides:
<https://speakerdeck.com/u/zcbenz/p/node-webkit-app-runtime-based-on-chromium-and-node-dot-js>

Repo: <https://github.com/rogerwang/node-webkit>

Lead on ARM: <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/node-webkit/mv9CSZgPEpA/WbmHZylfNOsJ>

--
Scott Elcomb
@psema4 on Twitter / Identi.ca / Github & more

Atomic OS: Self Contained Microsystems
http://code.google.com/p/atomos/

Member of the Pirate Party of Canada
http://www.pirateparty.ca/

[Jeremy Kahn]

Cool!  This looks like a really interesting project, but I don't totally understand how this would benefit Pine.  It seems to me like it turns Webkit into a sort of a view for a Node process.  Am I understanding it correctly?

I have two concerns with this approach:

• This may make it more difficult for game developers to make Pine games.  They will have to target the node-webkit platform, which is so far uncommon.  It seems that a node-webkit app is fundamentally different than a "standard" web app.  It may add a barrier to entry.
• We get a lot for free with Chromium, and it's unclear what the situation is with node-webkit.  The two biggest features that Pine developers will benefit from are the Chrome Dev Tools and NaCl (Native Client).  Are these features available for node-webkit, and if so, do they differ from the standard Chromium implementation?

I'm not saying "no" to node-webkit, I just want to thoroughly vet it as an option.

And, great find on the ARM documentation!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pine" group.
To post to this group, send email to pine-d...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pine-discuss...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
Jeremy Kahn

jerem...@gmail.com

https://github.com/jeremyckahn

@jeremyckahn

[Scott Elcomb]

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 11:07 PM, Jeremy Kahn <jerem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Cool! This looks like a really interesting project, but I don't totally
> understand how this would benefit Pine. It seems to me like it turns Webkit
> into a sort of a view for a Node process. Am I understanding it correctly?

Essentially.

> I have two concerns with this approach:
>
> This may make it more difficult for game developers to make Pine games.
> They will have to target the node-webkit platform, which is so far uncommon.
> It seems that a node-webkit app is fundamentally different than a "standard"
> web app. It may add a barrier to entry.

I'm only suggesting that it might solve the packaging issue - just a
zip file with a manifest (package.json). As far as developing, the
only difference is that developers can have node "for free" without
any hassle.

I'm not married to this idea; while reading through the docs though it
struck me that this would keep things well organized.

> We get a lot for free with Chromium, and it's unclear what the situation is
> with node-webkit. The two biggest features that Pine developers will
> benefit from are the Chrome Dev Tools and NaCl (Native Client). Are these
> features available for node-webkit, and if so, do they differ from the
> standard Chromium implementation?

node-webkit is chromium merged with node.js. On a thread about
websocket support I asked about PeerConnection API; from the repo
owner:

[-- Snippet starts --]
>> WebRTC also works, for the media part, you can read our Wiki:
>> https://github.com/rogerwang/node-webkit/wiki/Control-camera-and-microphone-with-getusermedia-api
>
> (Please say yes... would be a whole lot of awesome. ;-)
>
> Is the PeerConnection API supported or planned?

Should be.

A general way to tell this is that we are trying to support everything
supported in Chromium (Content Shell) and Node.

Since node-webkit is based on Chromium and Node this should be
natural. Anything not working should be a bug.
[-- Snippet ends --]

There's also this on the wiki:
<https://github.com/rogerwang/node-webkit/wiki/How-node.js-is-integrated-with-chromium>

Developer Tools can be enabled by adding --developer option to the nw command.

[Jeremy Kahn]

I can see value in simplifying game packages, but I don't feel that packaging is a huge pain point for us now.  I'd be curious how difficult it would be to modify an existing Pine game (when I have a demo working) and get it to run under node-webkit.  The conversion process would need to be trivial and the capabilities of the platform would need to be comparable for me to be open to this.

I'm also curious what the performance difference is.  Better performance would really be the one big selling point, at least for me.

On a side note, I am currently working on improving the menus.  They need more polish before they make sense in the context of a game console UI.  After that I can work on porting an existing game to work under Chrome with gamepad support.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pine" group.
To post to this group, send email to pine-d...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pine-discuss...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Alex Wilson]

This could let the Pine API be require'd in and the methods that query the database called directly, but I don't know about giving the developers access to node.js.