Package releases as binaries or .tar.gz files

[adamh-oai]

I'd like to distribute sl vis dotslash, which expects a .tar.gz file or plain binary. However, the linux releases are only packaged as .deb files. Could you also release a plain .tar.gz?

[gnat]

Yes please. Sapling looks really cool and I'd like to give it a spin.

plain binaries or AppImage or Flatpak would be great- just choose 1 or 2 and do it.

I'm on Ubuntu 23.10, moving to 24.04 LTS soon and can't use any of these prepared .deb files because they all want Python 3.10 specifically, ugh.. (libpython3.10-dev isn't even available to install.)

./sl: error while loading shared libraries: libpython3.10.so.1.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

Ubuntu-version specific debs are a pretty weak experience for developer workstations.

[bolinfest]

It's probably not a huge deal in this case, but there are some things you can do with a .deb that you can't do with a DotSlash release:

https://dotslash-cli.com/docs/limitations/#dotslash-is-not-a-package-manager

To make a DotSlash version of Sapling, we should probably include DotSlash versions of some of the dependencies that are listed in the .deb (such as node to run sl web).

[adamh-oai]

Interesting point. Maybe sl web could be distributed as a separate thing, to split up those deps. And then if sl-web is in your path it can pickup the subcommand like git does.

This doesn't solve my immediate goal, but an actual deb package repo would be handy too. Do the current releases embed a binary of python?