Rename NPM package to use organization prefix

[smellyshovel]

There was an idea in Slack to rename the NPM package to use the name @maplibre/maplibre-gl instead of the current unprefixed maplibre-gl.

I'll put my 2 cents in as well. maplibre-gl (prefixed or unprefixed - doesn't matter) is a bit misleading. I think the package name should denote explicitly that it's a JS lib. So maybe also change name to maplibre-gl-js (@maplibre/maplibre-gl-js)?

Backwards compatibility note: would be nice to have both packages available still (prefixed and unprefixed). And not only available, but updated simultaneously as well. I believe the current CI/CD setup should allow to do so without any major changes.

Generally, I see it a nice idea to have all the MapLibre's sttuff located under one common scope.

[smellyshovel]

@JannikGM also noticed that the way one should install the lib is (almost) not mentioned in the docs. Whis should also be addressed.

[rotu]

I'd be in favor of dropping both "gl" and "js" - js being the platform it runs on and gl being an implementation detail.

[ghost]

I think the gl might also refer to "mapbox graphics language" (~ style definitions) instead of referring to OpenGL / WebGL.

I agree that the js is not necessary in the npm name / should be avoided.

[rotu]

Here's what I found:

Mapbox GL is a suite of open-source libraries for embedding customizable and responsive client-side maps in web, mobile, and desktop applications. Mapbox GL maps render at a high frame rate. The abbreviation "GL" comes from OpenGL, the industry-standard Open Graphics Library.

So "GL" appears to be branding taken from OpenGL. It does not appear to be related to the style definitions (at least historically).

[wipfli]

Since v3 is coming closer, this could be a breaking change we want to consider... #1716

[HarelM]

This was discussed in the past (I'll probably won't be able to find where) and the decision was to keep the current name. I was also in favor of prefixing it with maplibre but this was not supported in a TSC meeting, I think.
Also, this is not an issue, converting it into a discussion...

[HarelM]

Found it! #184
This was the original discussion.

[wipfli]

Thanks for finding the previous discussion. I guess this was some time ago and we can again discuss this change now...

[HarelM]

Has anything changed since this was discussed? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it, but reopening decisions can be a "dangerous" path...

[wipfli]

I think the old argument that changing the name of the npm package leads to extra work for users without sufficient extra benefit is still valid actually...