Released assets naming scheme is confusing

[conf]

Description

I'm trying to automate installing gh-ost in my Dockerfile. And current assets naming scheme is a bit confusing and makes automation unnecessarily harder.
Consider this screenshot:

• gh-ost turns out to be Darwin-arm64, but it's not really obvious from the name
• RPM and Deb packages have release version embedded in their file name, while other files do not do that.
• RPM's embedded version is different from Deb's version, i.e. 1.1.10-1 vs 1.1.10
• Biggest painpoint - TAR archives have generated timestamp in their names which makes automating harder - instead of just downloading from latest release, you need to list the available assets inside a release first and only then you can pick the one you need.
• TAR archives have -binary suffix
• Also, RPM and Deb packages lack ARM64 versions

Proposed naming scheme

• Do not embed timestamps in file names
• Do not embed release versions in file names. Github download url already includes release version, i.e. https://github.com/github/gh-ost/releases/download/v1.1.10/gh-ost-1.1.10-1.x86_64.rpm - second version embedding of 1.1.10 seems excessive, we can do just https://github.com/github/gh-ost/releases/download/v1.1.10/gh-ost.x86_64.rpm
• Provide ARM64 versions of Deb and RPM packages
• Strip -binary suffix from TAR archives
• Not sure what to do with generic gh-ost - rename to gh-ost-darwin-arm64 (would make os/arch obvious), make it universal binary (pack amd64 and arm64 in one binary and name it gh-ost-darwin), or just delete since all other versions already cover all choices.

I'd love to supply a PR if we agree this needs to be fixed.
Cheers!

[meiji163]

I agree with changing the release naming if you want to open a PR!

[conf]

@meiji163 Done, please, have a look at #1729.