ci(compile): and publish

[Mte90]

I suggest to do a squash merge as I did various tests.

This PR automatically compile, generate a zip, create a new release and attach that file.
It is executed when a new tag is configured in the repository.

[sonic2kk]

Thanks! I appreciate the work here.

It looks like this will compile a standard binary. Is this portable for systems that don't have leveldb? Mainly, I'm thinking of the case of using this on Steam Deck, primarily with SteamTinkerLaunch (although it's a general concern for people that may have other immutable distros, such as Bazzite).

Even if not, I'll still merge this because having a binary on its own is still useful for people with alternative use cases (or someone who may want to package this). Although I'm wondering how much work a follow-up PR would be to build an AppImage for use on SteamOS (or, if you know of an alternative portable packaging solution, I'm all ears!)

I think this solves part of #1, the remaining work is then to build an AppImage.

[Mte90]

So compiles with leveldb libraries so it should works also where is not installed.

Do you think that an appimage is needed? as it is a simple binary like innoextract etc

[sonic2kk]

Do you think that an appimage is needed? as it is a simple binary like innoextract etc

innoextract is taken from the Arch repos only for SteamOS and only for SteamTinkerLaunch. This project is much more general, and will happen to be used by SteamTinkerLaunch.

In terms of building with LevelDB, are there any licensing concerns? This project is licensed under MIT, LevelDB is licensed under BSD-3 Clause. This is a general concern I had with packaging the project, including for an AppImage, as I am not a lawyer and don't know what restrictions may apply (it's also why no work was done on packaging for a long time!).

I understand you're (probably 😉) not a lawyer either, so I get it if you're the wrong person to ask. This is entirely new ground for me though and any info you have at all is great, because it's probably already more than I have!

Licensing issues aside that would apply no matter how we package, for use with STL, I would prefer to use an AppImage, just like with Yad, yes. 🙂

[Mte90]

Reading here the 2 license allows what you are trying to do https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/licence/compatibility-check/BSD-3-Clause/MIT

[sonic2kk]

Looks good then, just one more question (sorry if it seems like I'm splitting hairs here...):

The inbound licence is a permissive licence: provide you respect and include all existing copyrights or trademarks and [...]

Since we're simply including the leveldb header and not modifying the copyright notices in LevelDB itself, we should also be good on this front I imagine?

[sonic2kk]

Approvals aren't set up for this repo (since it's just me as a code owner) but pressing the "Approved" button is satisfying both to do and to receive, so I like doing it when I remember to :-)

I checked a bit more out about the BSD-3 license and I think just as you said we are good. I will merge this.

Thank you!

[Mte90]

Yes it is like you are saying.
It is enough that you mention in the readme that leveldb is a dependence to compile it.