Automatically add download links to the releases

[almet]

This is not yet finished, but it adds the download links to the releases.

This is added to the end of "release" posts:

[almet]

I changed the approach and now it includes the list of download targets (the same one from the main index.html page) at the end of release announcements:

[almet]

I've just updated this PR so that index.html automatically gets the latest release version from the posts (so there is no need for a site.version field anymore).

I've also made it so that it uses the "post" layout by default for files in the "news" folder.

[apyrgio]

Oh, that's a very interesting approach. I like the fact that we're reusing elements, and having our announcement on our site as our source of truth means that we can point to it from various places; our Mastodon posts, and maybe even our GitHub release page, if we want to avoid duplication.

One thing I noticed, but may not be super important, is that for Linux users, there's no easy way to "Download Dangerzone 0.7.1", as we point out in our news section. The installation instructions we give' em will always download the latest release. Do you think that's a problem?

[almet]

One thing I noticed, but may not be super important, is that for Linux users, there's no easy way to "Download Dangerzone 0.7.1", as we point out in our news section. The installation instructions we give' em will always download the latest release. Do you think that's a problem?

You're correct. Because we're pruning the {apt,yum}-tools-prod repositories each time we release a new version, we don't have a simple way to download the previous packages. It's still doable, but a) does not seem not advisable and b) will require downloading packages out of band from the apt or yum commands. Maybe it's good to keep them downloading the latest versions (until we are packaged upstream).

OR we could also continue hosting the previous versions, and change how we release new packages, by keeping the old ones and just adding the new ones, in the case there is a reason to keep supporting the old versions for a reason.

[apyrgio]

One thing we could do is add a line in our installation instructions, that "you can always download the deb/rpm by following this ", where said link will be a tagged URL to apt-tools-prod / yum-tools-prod. Signing steps will still apply, this is just for testing. But it may be an overkill.

OR we could also continue hosting the previous versions, and change how we release new packages, by keeping the old ones and just adding the new ones, in the case there is a reason to keep supporting the old versions for a reason.

Hm, each .deb/.rpm is now ~490MiB, which is less than 800+ it was before. We could do it, but we would require lots of storage space (and bandwidth) in the node (or personal devices) where we git clone this repos. This will prove a bit difficult.

[almet]

One thing we could do is add a line in our installation instructions, that "you can always download the deb/rpm by following this ", where said link will be a tagged URL to apt-tools-prod / yum-tools-prod. Signing steps will still apply, this is just for testing. But it may be an overkill.

I agree. Having some documentation (on the repo, not here) to explain how to install previous versions might be useful. I've just opened an issue about it.

Hm, each .deb/.rpm is now ~490MiB, which is less than 800+ it was before. We could do it, but we would require lots of storage space (and bandwidth) in the node (or personal devices) where we git clone this repos. This will prove a bit difficult.

Yep yep, and I see little value in doing so, especially as the old versions aren't really useful as the container inside gets out of date.

About the changes here, should we merge them as is for now or do you think they require some more changes?

[apyrgio]

I don't see anything else that needs to change. Since this is a website enhancement, I'd wait a tad bit so that @harrislapiroff can take a look as well. But it's a 👍 from me.

[harrislapiroff]

This looks great! I love the clever use of a frontmatter version field.

I added a couple nitpicks of code that predates you, just informationally. Fix them if you feel inspired, or just ignore.

I also added one thought (should we indicate newer versions on old posts?), also not a blocker.

I notice your editing reformatted the indentation. Not something to resolve in this PR, but we should probably add a .editorconfig to formalize tab and linebreak styles.

Approved—merge when you're ready!

[harrislapiroff]

LGTM! Let's ship it!