project-navigation
Personal tools

Author Topic: no convenient Windows IDE (split from "UFO:AI sucks ?")  (Read 2167 times)

Offline Mattn

  • CaveExpress
  • Administrator
  • PHALANX Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 4830
  • www.caveproductions.org
    • View Profile
    • CaveExpress
no convenient Windows IDE (split from "UFO:AI sucks ?")
« on: April 19, 2014, 01:10:58 pm »
Quote
The lack of a convenient Windows IDE

hehe - nice option to vote for. Isn't there Visual Studio available in a lite version that could be used for the windows users? They would of course still need to set up all their build environment by themselves - but I think they are used to it. Otherwise they would use Linux ;)

But now that almost all (if not all) dependencies are also included in the source tree of ufoai it shouldn't be that hard to do that in visual studio i think - some windows user is willing to provide some project files?

Offline Grug

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 56
    • View Profile
Re: no convenient Windows IDE (split from "UFO:AI sucks ?")
« Reply #1 on: April 19, 2014, 03:33:24 pm »
They would of course still need to set up all their build environment by themselves - but I think they are used to it. Otherwise they would use Linux ;)
Not at all... if they are on Windows then they need to be spoon-fed.

Offline Duke

  • Administrator
  • PHALANX veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 1037
    • View Profile
Re: no convenient Windows IDE (split from "UFO:AI sucks ?")
« Reply #2 on: April 19, 2014, 09:11:25 pm »
C'mon mattn, we don't even have a list of the needed libs with their versions...

Offline Mattn

  • CaveExpress
  • Administrator
  • PHALANX Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 4830
  • www.caveproductions.org
    • View Profile
    • CaveExpress
Re: no convenient Windows IDE (split from "UFO:AI sucks ?")
« Reply #3 on: April 19, 2014, 09:52:40 pm »
But now that almost all (if not all) dependencies are also included in the source tree of ufoai it shouldn't be that hard to do that in visual studio i think - some windows user is willing to provide some project files?

so why should you know version and libs?

and please keep in mind that my intention was not to start a flamewar. i would with pleasure add the project files - but still a windows user has to create (and maintain) them. the requirements are here: http://ufoai.org/wiki/Coding#Requirements so if anyone wants to jump in. please do.

Offline Duke

  • Administrator
  • PHALANX veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 1037
    • View Profile
Re: no convenient Windows IDE (split from "UFO:AI sucks ?")
« Reply #4 on: April 19, 2014, 10:48:44 pm »
If all the dependencies are in the repo, why then does radiant not compile ?

Offline Duke

  • Administrator
  • PHALANX veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 1037
    • View Profile
Re: no convenient Windows IDE (split from "UFO:AI sucks ?")
« Reply #5 on: April 19, 2014, 11:16:15 pm »
I have long since learned that neither you nor me will do that, because you don't have the HW and OS anymore and I don't (want to) have the skill to do it.

I don't consider this a flamewar at all. My point is merely that we are losing a lot of potential help because some 90% of all potential contributors are still on Windoze afaik.

Offline Mattn

  • CaveExpress
  • Administrator
  • PHALANX Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 4830
  • www.caveproductions.org
    • View Profile
    • CaveExpress
Re: no convenient Windows IDE (split from "UFO:AI sucks ?")
« Reply #6 on: April 20, 2014, 08:49:00 am »
If all the dependencies are in the repo, why then does radiant not compile ?

i was referring to the game - i don't think we should put something as gtk into our repo. but the game should hopefully be compilable without the need to install external deps (and if not, we should fix that for sure)

gtkradiant is a totally different story. we could still collect everything that is needed in a github project - but as i said for this before, it must get maintained. And that is work that a windows user has to do in order to check whether updates works. So for gtkradiant I would really rather say a) set up on your own - free versions each time b) only compile the game. And in terms of contributors I think that people are more interested in helping out with the game than the editor (even though i might be wrong here)

It would also be possible to just switch the build system to something like cmake or premake. then we only have to maintain one build system and could generate project files for almost every ide out there. But to be honest, i'm not equipped with a lot of experience about cmake or premake. I would prefer cmake over premake - but even that is not based on wisdom - but ... feelings.