miller versus mlr - naming issues

[rubyFeedback]

Hey John,

Sorry for being nitpicky here.

I recently discovered miller so I proceeded to download it.

We can see lots of options:

https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/releases/download/v5.9.0/miller-5.9.0-1.src.rpm

Also:

https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/releases/download/v5.9.0/mlr-5.9.0.tar.gz

This was where I got confused ... "mlr" ... isn't the name miller?

We also have this tarball:

https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/archive/v5.9.0.tar.gz

which extracts to ...

miller-5.9.0

I would suggest something like:

https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/releases/download/v5.9.0/miller-5.9.0.tar.gz

Or so that also expands to "miller-5.9.0". This would be the simplest IMO.

The "mlr" tarballs are a bit confusing. Perhaps you have totally valid reasons for
using it, but to me, as a first-time visitor, it is a bit confusing. (To clarify why I
even mention this; I actually collect source archives on my own via self-written
ruby scripts, and then use that to compile e. g. a linux system. The code in
miller works fine; for me it would be preferrable if the naming scheme in use
would be simpler and more "streamlined" - but of course I also don't know other
reasons, which may explain the naming scheme in use, so please excuse
that too. Do feel free to close this issue at any moment in time - it is so miniscule
that I don't even know whether it should be raised at all or not.

[johnkerl]

Thanks @rubyFeedback !! You are TOTALLY right and if I had it to do all over again I would not have named the tool twice. :(

The docs say "miller" but the command-line tool is mlr. And as you point out some of the tar-file names have mlr but really should have mlr in their names.

I think if I changed all the miller to mlr (or vice versa) things would break in various distros ...

One thing I think I might be able to do without breaking anything is putting 'miller' in the name

https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/releases/download/v5.10.0/mlr-5.10.0.tar.gz

although some of the distros' auto-update scripts might be triggering on the current spelling. Regardless that should be something I can flush out with the various distro-package maintainers ...

[skitt]

The Debian package looks for tags under https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/tags and extracts the version without caring about the prefix. I can’t remember off-hand what the Fedora version check does...

[johnkerl]

@rubyFeedback for 5.10.3, and for 6.0.0 (coming soon!) and beyond the naming convention is miller-i.j.k.tar.gz. (See also https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/blob/main/create-release-tarball)

Thank you!! :)