Hi everyone,
There is this overview here. They all in one way or another provide a runtime that can execute your web code. Then they differ in whether they ship the entire runtime stack (e.g. Chromium) or whether they use what is there on the users’ systems (e.g. webview).
In comparing them and trying to choose one, I was thinking:
Building
Tauri, e.g., requires you to build binaries (couldnt find prebuilt). That means you need an entire additional build environment and will have additional build time (of a binary, not just a (web)-pack).
Code signing
What’s that? Afaik, this is a form of protection racket (albeit legal) where you have to pay money to Microsoft, and if not, whenever a user wants to open your executable there will be a giant error screen (“Smart Screen”) warning the user to open this executable. This error screen uses dark patterns to make granting exceptions as difficult as possible.
As far as I could research, Steam (maybe even itch.io) gets you a pass. But I am not there yet to test it.
Anyway, since code signing is based on trust (in some way; tldr), using prebuilt binaries of large open source projects, in my mind, this will increase the chance that the Smart Screen will give you a pass.
Misc
Nwjs is basically zero setup. You dump your web files into a dir and be done. Electron needs backend setup code (in js though).
Nwjs theoretically offers “code protection” in that it converts your js sources into some sort of binary package. But I cannot get this to work with a hello-world script.
Electron seems to be the biggest project. So getting help will likely be easiest here.
What do you think? How did you decide and what did you choose? If I remember right, @bitmo_games @phaselock @TiagoSilvaPereira @mise you guys are on Steam already, right? May I ping you for advice 
Best wishes
Joe
. Used Electron almost a decade ago, janky, huge files, works but I found it tedious to manage for a solo dev.