SwiftBar icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
SwiftBar copied to clipboard

Consider removing build number from release asset

Open fenhl opened this issue 10 months ago • 7 comments

I'm trying to get SwiftBar updated in Homebrew and ran into 2 issues:

  1. The method recommended by the contributing guide to update a cask, brew bump --open-pr swiftbar, didn't work because it was looking for the release asset with build number b520 from 2.0.0, while 2.0.1 uses b536, so I had to create the PR manually.
  2. One of the required verification steps, brew audit --cask --online swiftbar, fails for presumably the same reason.

If the build number were removed from the filename, that would make automation tasks like this easier to set up.

fenhl avatar Feb 27 '25 23:02 fenhl

You are saying that having a stable SwiftBar.zip will help to address this issue?

melonamin avatar Feb 27 '25 23:02 melonamin

SwiftBar.v2.0.1.zip, without the b536 part, should also be fine. The version number is already required to build the full URL after all.

fenhl avatar Feb 27 '25 23:02 fenhl

Updated in the latest release, so you can give it a try.

I would need to update the Sparkle thingy, but that shouldn't be too much work.

melonamin avatar Feb 27 '25 23:02 melonamin

Thanks, I can't test it anymore because the PR already exists now, but we'll know for sure on the next release after 2.0.1.

fenhl avatar Feb 27 '25 23:02 fenhl

Think this may have caused an issue with being able to update or install via homebrew?

https://github.com/swiftbar/SwiftBar/releases/download/v2.0.1/SwiftBar.v2.0.1.zip

vs

https://github.com/swiftbar/SwiftBar/releases/download/v2.0.1/SwiftBar.v2.0.1.b536.zip

Image

mtscope avatar Mar 02 '25 03:03 mtscope

Looking at https://github.com/swiftbar/SwiftBar/releases/tag/v2.0.1 it seems like the release asset name was reverted to include the build number again. I had removed it from the Homebrew PR (https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-cask/pull/203229) following https://github.com/swiftbar/SwiftBar/issues/433#issuecomment-2689354744.

@melonamin Was this intentional? Should we adjust Homebrew to include the build number again?

fenhl avatar Mar 02 '25 03:03 fenhl

@fenhl Yeah, I did it yesterday on the go and forgot to comment here; sorry.

Autoupdate relies on this versioning scheme, and there is no easy way to fix it, so we're stuck with it for now.

melonamin avatar Mar 02 '25 11:03 melonamin