dracflamloc on 23/3/2005 at 06:27
Writing it in C.
I'm not quite sure how I'll have the FMs come. I think that 7zip has been recommended in another thread, but personally I prefer regular zip since its so common. So we'll see.
As for the FM info and settings it will be in the usual INI format.
The progress bar has a percentage static text, I didn't think it was needed for the rating but its now added.
Preview 2 is up.
David on 23/3/2005 at 07:38
I'll write an RSS ticker for it from TheCircle's FM database.
Easiest for me would be RSS 0.91.
I will say EURGH! at IE embedded in it. All it takes is one subtley constructed FM file and someone's PC could be taken over. I'd prefer a plain text box over an insecure HTML one any day.
Andruha on 23/3/2005 at 08:37
Looks really good.
- I like the idea of FM feed, but only in conjuction with companion feature: automated mission preview, download and install (the way Firefox can install extensions from trusted sites.) If the feature cannot make it into FL, then I would not bother with RSS feed, as I imagine that to get feeds people would prefer their favourite clients.
- It would be great if you could make FL easily skinnable or at least windows styles friendly (it is now, thanks).
- I also vote for plain text to write briefings, ect..
As I pointed in ShadowLoader thread, an alternative that could be added later is structured text (ST). ST can be translated into HTML for displaying purposes under FL. Since structured text is just a text (could be accompanied with images), it should be easy to avoid dangerous contents and it will allow FL to control what is passed to the rendering engine.
This structured text tool might be useful:
- (
http://docutils.sourceforge.net/)
- (
http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/tools.html)
It is written in Python and in general, python modules are easy to embed into programs written in C languages.
SneaksieDave on 23/3/2005 at 08:42
Quote Posted by dracflamloc
I'm not quite sure how I'll have the FMs come. I think that 7zip has been recommended in another thread, but personally I prefer regular zip since its so common. So we'll see.
I'd also recommend the free (
http://www.rarlab.com) winrar library. I've used it before and it's pretty easy to use.
doctormidnight on 23/3/2005 at 08:51
Another vote for winrar, it supports a ton of file types, has a nice interface, is widely used, and the context menu is very customizeable.
Image linked for size:
(
http://www.sherlockholmesarmy.org/raroptions.jpg)
SubJeff on 23/3/2005 at 09:10
I'm confused. Please clarify - has all Fleshloader work switched to this version or is this in competition with the other one?
Kingers on 23/3/2005 at 09:22
Shadow is still very much alive, this has been started because some people are anti .NET
[dracflamloc] You can see the format I had chosen for the "header.ini" on page 3 of the Shadow thread.
Shadowcat on 23/3/2005 at 09:42
And there I was all happy because the 7-Zip integration had happened so quickly and easily, and now people are talking about a different loader not supporting it. Argh.
You at least have to support the same compression options as the .net version! It would be silly if particular fan missions required a particular loader to work.
Kingers seemed to get 7-Zip integrated within a very short space of time, so I do not believe that the SDK can be hard to work with. Certainly the end-user software is exceptionally simple to work with. I don't believe that RAR has any advantages, and I think that 7-Zip compression is superior. It will reduce both download times and the bandwidth used by the host sites, so there shouldn't be any question about whether it gets supported or not.
It's far easier to get the support in right from the start than to add it later, so you should do it now. See (
www.7-zip.org) for the SDKs and other downloads.
btw, I don't know whether or not the 7-Zip SDK would easily make this all seamless for something like Fleshloader, but the client software opens and decompresses all of .7z, .zip, and .rar files, so it may be that using 7-Zip would allow all of these options in any case.
Andruha on 23/3/2005 at 10:41
Personally, I do not care how many Loaders exist (but I would always choose lean over bloat) - the more choises the better.
What is unfortunate is that we have these two projects goind on and the stress in both seems to be more on the technology side, rather then interoperability.
It would benefit all current and future Loaders, FM creators, fans and mission rating and repository systems if we take a moment to think about set of elements in a typical FM and clearly define conventions for each. Conventions that will become standards for us.
When standards are settled, then eager funs might be able to install missions manually as soon as first FMs are out. Loaders will follow shortly, as it is much easier to code an application when you know exactly what to support.
Loader is just a convenience, not the essence. Conventions are more important.
Kingers and dracflamloc, do not hurry and split the community. You have a unique chance to do right from the beginning - do not waste it.
Kingers on 23/3/2005 at 11:39
edit.
