Closed Andrei-Pozolotin closed 8 years ago
Would simply naming the release artifacts to include the version be sufficient, or do you think also naming the contents inside the tarball to include the version number would be appropriate?
1) yes: "inside the tarball to include the version number would be appropriate"
2) rkt
have established a "standard", other modules must now follow:
https://github.com/coreos/rkt/releases/download/v1.7.0/rkt-v1.7.0.tar.gz
3) it is also not how docker does it, then must be good :-) https://get.docker.com/builds/Linux/x86_64/docker-1.11.2.tgz
The artifact for the most recent release (v0.3.1) follows the format "acbuild-$VERSION.tar.gz" and the acbuild binary inside this artifact is placed in a directory named "acbuild-$VERSION".
Or in other words:
derek@proton ~> tar tfv acbuild-v0.3.1.tar.gz
-rwxr-xr-x root/root 11025984 2016-06-15 15:41 acbuild-v0.3.1/acbuild
I'm going to close this issue, if there's something else on this subject that I've missed please feel free to reopen it.
works, thank you https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/acbuild/
please use consistent naming pattern for release paths:
compare: https://github.com/coreos/rkt/releases vs https://github.com/appc/acbuild/releases
1) have a version in artifact name: https://github.com/coreos/rkt/releases/download/v1.7.0/rkt-v1.7.0.tar.gz
2) does not have a version in artifact name: https://github.com/appc/acbuild/releases/download/v0.3.0/acbuild.tar.gz
version is good when you do not want an overwrite on every untar