[Releasing] archive file naming with -rc version suffix

[Mark Brand]

Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2013 09.18.21, Mark Brand wrote:
>> Noticed that there is a slight problem with package file naming for rc-1.
>> The suffix "-rc1" is missing from the version in the filename:
>>
>> http://releases.qt-project.org/qt5/5.0.1-rc1/submodules_tar/qtbase-opensourc
>> e-src-5.0.1.tar.xz
>>
>> Also, these should unpack into a directory with matching name, i.e.:
>> qtbase-opensource-src-5.0.1-rc1.
> That was intentional. The patch-level RCs are the actual release: when we are
> satisfied with a package set, we will release *that* set, no rebuilding. We are giving the "rc" name just for testers' benefit.

I understand the argument. However, it cannot be said ahead of time that 
any RC will be the final release. If it isn't, then there will be failed 
RC archives around with the same name as the final release, which is 
likely to cause confusion. The name collision makes it impossible to 
keep the RCs and final release in the same directory. Finally, it's 
inconvenient for scripted build, packaging, and testing, say, for distros.

>> Compare to the 5.0.0-rc1, which is correct:
>>
>> http://releases.qt-project.org/qt5/5.0.0-rc1/submodules_tar/qtbase-opensource-src-5.0.0-rc1.tar.xz
> That's a separate procedure. It requires rebuilding everything to remove the  "-rcX" from the name. It's acceptable for the longer process for the minor release, but not for the patch-level.

It might be too late to fix (from my perspective) the RC naming 
convention for 5.0.1, but I hope it will be seriously considered when it 
next becomes possible.

Mark