Provide github release binaries?

[jpambrun]

Maybe it's not fair to ask, but it would be nice to have github release binaries for the cli. I don't really like to curl | bash and it would allow many existing tools, (aqua, eget, etc..) to fetch and install.

[Byron]

Thanks a lot for suggesting this!

It's not the first time this came up and I also think that it's a perfectly viable alternative distribution mechanism. It could be as easy as uploading properly named archives to the respective GH release, a system we already use.

Let me CC @krlvi and also @slarse for this, maybe a decision can be made then.

[Byron]

No, I meant the CLI updater, Tauri clearly isn't involved.

I think @jpambrun talks about the asset list in GH releases. Is this where we could or can't go?

Happy to postpone this as well if it's more than a minor inconvenience, and @krlvi would also have an opinion on this. My simple approach is "more channels are better", maybe that's wrong as well.

[jpambrun]

I appreciate all the discussions. For some context, I like to use tools that are portable statically linked binaries. This give me the confidence that I can bring my tool to macos, older linux over ssh or github/lab ci jobs.

These days I am using aqua and encouraging teammates to do the same. It allows all of us to have the same version of bun, biome, deno, duckdb, etc. This is amazing with the goring popularity of go and rust tools, most of which are adhering to github releases with similar naming conventions that can be parsed. This is in line with gitoxide that @Byron is showing.

Personally, I am not super comfortable with curl piped in bash install methods, and the auto-update idea doesn't feel desirable either.

[slarse]

Personally, I am not super comfortable with curl piped in bash install methods, and the auto-update idea doesn't feel desirable either.

Absolutely understandable.

Just to be clear, there is no auto-update, there's an update command you can run for the binary to "replace itself". The CLI won't just update itself out from under your feet if you just grab the binary, it's an explicit action. In case there was any confusion about that.

We of course want to offer more experienced users like yourself the option to just grab the binary and roll with that. Just to ensure that we're not falling for the X/Y-problem here: is it important that the binaries are hosted on GitHub specifically, or is it just anywhere where you can find them? Are there any specific requirements from your end? I had a quick peek at aqua but wasn't able to determine what exactly is necessary to configure a registry at a glance. I gathered that there's built-in support for GitHub release assets, but that's about it.

Also, what platform are you on?

[jpambrun]

Yes, I was confused about the auto update. Thanks for the clarification.

There is an ecosystem of installer/updater around GH releases specifically. eget, ubi, I am not sure if aqua can support something else, but most seem from GH release, https://github.com/jpillora/installer (which is curl | bash making me look like an hypocrite, but I can easily parse it 😄).

So GH release is very desirable. I am on WSL+Arch, and Linux over SSH, many teammates are on OSX.

[slarse]

There is an ecosystem of installer/updater around GH releases specifically. eget, ubi, I am not sure if aqua can support something else, but most seem from GH release

This is valuable feedback, I wasn't aware any of this existed. I'll propagate this info and we'll see what we can do with it :)

(which is curl | bash making me look like an hypocrite, but I can easily parse it 😄).

Not at all. I totally feel where you are coming from, curl | bash is problematic in several ways, but somehow still a bit of an industry standard nowadays (aqua has one, too!). It's a tradeoff between convenience and security. I'm all for offering alternatives for those that don't want to use it, and want external package managers to deal with the versioning. It's all very sensible to me.

So GH release is very desirable. I am on WSL+Arch, and Linux over SSH, many teammates are on OSX.

Gotcha, thanks for the info. I'll see where we can take this.

[krlvi]

Our release pipeline produce binaries that can be downloaded straight from GitHub - as an example this one: https://github.com/gitbutlerapp/gitbutler/actions/runs/22053448955

So technically anybody could simply grab the binaries from there directly from there. We could link to that somewhere, but it is a bit of an "implementation detail" - if we change how we do releases, or choose to use non-GitHub CI etc things might change.

I think perhaps the question here is "can i just get a download link that i can install manually" - I think the answer to that is yes - we can update our page to provide just download links.

Regarding updaters - historically we have always had the UI Tauri-native updater, which has some specific expectations on version numbers and how it gets the latest version. For the time being we cant get around that, at least not until we have moved away from Tauri. For the CLI, we have a custom updater mechanism - that can be fully disabled for users who prefer that.
For the default behavior however, it is very valuable to have it in place because at the rate at which the project evolves, things change quickly and it is difficult to support old app versions. So at least users being aware that there is an update (which notification of which they can suppress with but update suppress or disable entirely) helps people know there is something newer out there at least.

[slarse]

The release pipeline produces archives with everything in them. Which I guess might be OK, but if you're just looking for the CLI binary it's a bit of an effort.

[krlvi]

But back to the download a binary question - i think this is largely a design topic. @PavelLaptev what do you think of having some kind of "download cli binary" thing on our website?

[slarse]

If we're talking website, I think a quick workshop on how to structure the Linux downloads would be in order. There are six of them right now and they're a bit confusingly labeled.

what do you think of having some kind of "download cli binary" thing on our website?

If we go that route, we should make the effort to produce CLI-only binaries for Windows and macOS too, yeah?

[krlvi]

i see! well you guys figure out what is a super nice and helpful way to display it :)