Change asset names for better intuitive download experience of newcomers to Ferdium

[Alphrag]

Hi everyone,
It seems that the name of the assets in the release section is quite confusing and hard to get by for new users that wonder what they should download. I am suggesting to change the assets name to make them more homogeneous.
My proposition will be the following: all assets will be named with the convention

Ferdium-<target_os>[-<os_option>]-<version_with_channel>[-<target_arch>].<extension>

where:

• <target_os> is one of Mac, Win, Linux;
• <os_option> is an optional string to differentiate the type of the asset such as AutoSetup, Installer, Portable, Unpacked or something similar (suggestions welcomed);
• <version_with_channel> is the automatic version from the builder such as 6.0.0-nightly.xx or 6.0.0-beta.x
• <target_arch> is an optional argument for specific architectures such as arm64 for mac with arm chip, ia32 for 32bits windows installer, or one of [amd64, arm64, armv7l] for the linux deb package;
• <extension> is the extension of the file (e.g. dmg, zip, msi, exe, deb, AppImage, freebsd, rpm).

So a few questions on which I would like as much feedback as possible:

• Do you think this would be better than the current naming?
• Should the <os_option> and <target_arch> elements be merged into one? Or kept separate but next to each other instead of putting the cpu architecture at the end?
• I assume there that linux users are aware of the package for their distro (which is also in the extension). Is it a fair assumption, or should we add another possible value in <os_option> to account for that?

[vraravam]

I like the proposed ordering of segments.

[SpecialAro]

I also like the proposal @Alphrag. I think this way things are better organized for end-users.

On question: won't this change mess with electron-updater utility when doing auto-updates?

[Alphrag]

I can confirm that this doesn't mess with the auto-update, since these rely on the value found in latest.yml which is made by the builder, and thus contain the same name as the installer itself.

[vraravam]

In that case, lets go ahead and do this change before we decide on 6.0.0

[SpecialAro]

In that case, lets go ahead and do this change before we decide on 6.0.0

Totally agree with this! Let's implement it then

[Alphrag]

Ok, I'll add this. Last question before doing so: on windows the nsis and portable versions bundle all arch at the same time. As much as I don't really case for the nsis which will be used to install and then will be deleted by the user, I am wondering if we should have the portable versions for different arch being separate. This will provide the user with a lighter executable as shown in the image below.

Is it worth having these architecture separated or not? (the one with all arch will be created in any case apparently)

[SpecialAro]

I think it is worthy if it reduces file size. Tho, are we able to not build the one created with all the arch?

[vraravam]

i dont think there's any exclusion mechanism in electron-builder for the target OS/architectures

[SpecialAro]

Then we keep it... no problem

[Alphrag]

Renaming has now been implemented in #407.

[vraravam]

Is there a corresponding PR in the website repo?

[Alphrag]

Not yet, I'll do that tomorrow morning, as well as making PR on the repos taking care of the different auto-update for the package managers.

[vraravam]

I can take care of the homebrew repo. If I have time, and if I release the upcoming nightly, i will review the website repo as well - if any changes are required

[vraravam]

Done changes in the https://github.com/ferdium/homebrew-ferdium repo. Could not find any changes to be done in the https://github.com/ferdium/ferdium-website repo.