Rename .deb files to skip per-distro subdirectories in S3

[tyler-yankee]

Issue: #19735

• Change _push_deb in push_release.py to copy artifacts directly to the drake_release folder in S3, rather than the per-distro subdirectories. The platform name is hyphenated at the end of the filename.
• Change push_release to copy the corresponding filename convention.

---

This change is 

[tyler-yankee]

Reviewable status: 1 unresolved discussion, LGTM missing from assignee BetsyMcPhail, missing label for release notes (waiting on @tyler-yankee)

---

a discussion (no related file):
+@BetsyMcPhail for feature review

[mwoehlke-kitware]

tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release.py line 357 at r2 (raw file):

    """
    for deb in state.find_artifacts(_Manifest.RE_DEB):
        dest_name = f'drake/release/drake-dev_{deb.version}_{deb.arch}-{deb.platform}.{deb.ext}'

Note, keeping this ≤ 79 chars is preferred. Maybe move some of the RHS to a temporary dest_suffix?

[mwoehlke-kitware]

tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release.py line 357 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, mwoehlke-kitware (Matthew Woehlke) wrote…

Note, keeping this ≤ 79 chars is preferred. Maybe move some of the RHS to a temporary dest_suffix?

Also, this is a path, not a file name; consider keeping dest_path and not having a dest_name.

[BetsyMcPhail]

Reviewable status: 3 unresolved discussions, LGTM missing from assignees mwoehlke-kitware,BetsyMcPhail, commits need curation (https://drake.mit.edu/reviewable.html#curated-commits), missing label for release notes (waiting on @tyler-yankee)

---

a discussion (no related file):

Previously, tyler-yankee wrote…

+@BetsyMcPhail for feature review

+@mwoehlke-kitware for feature review please

---

tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release line 107 at r2 (raw file):

    # Add the Debian package to the aptly database.
    aptly repo add "drake-${platform}" "${filename}"

@mwoehlke-kitware - Should the filename here should remain the same as it is now with no platform? For example, drake-dev_1.37.0-1_amd64.deb

[tyler-yankee]

tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release.py line 357 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, mwoehlke-kitware (Matthew Woehlke) wrote…

Also, this is a path, not a file name; consider keeping dest_path and not having a dest_name.

Thanks, agreed. Fixed in the most recent commit.

[mwoehlke-kitware]

Reviewable status: 4 unresolved discussions, LGTM missing from assignee BetsyMcPhail, commits need curation (https://drake.mit.edu/reviewable.html#curated-commits), missing label for release notes (waiting on @tyler-yankee)

---

a discussion (no related file):

Previously, BetsyMcPhail (Betsy McPhail) wrote…

+@mwoehlke-kitware for feature review please

aside from pending discussion on naming for aptly.

---

tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release line 107 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, BetsyMcPhail (Betsy McPhail) wrote…

@mwoehlke-kitware - Should the filename here should remain the same as it is now with no platform? For example, drake-dev_1.37.0-1_amd64.deb

Are you asking if we should remove the platform from the file prior to aptly repo add? I don't know... ask someone with more Debian packaging knowledge. 🙂

---

tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release.py line 359 at r3 (raw file):

        dest_path_suffix = f'{deb.version}_{deb.arch}-{deb.platform}.{deb.ext}'
        state.push_artifact(deb, _AWS_BUCKET,
                            f'drake/release/drake-dev_{dest_path_suffix}')

Consider?

Suggestion:

        dest_suffix = f'{deb.version}_{deb.arch}-{deb.platform}.{deb.ext}'
        dest_path = f'drake/release/drake-dev_{dest_suffix}'
        state.push_artifact(deb, _AWS_BUCKET, dest_path)

[tyler-yankee]

tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release.py line 359 at r3 (raw file):

Previously, mwoehlke-kitware (Matthew Woehlke) wrote…

Consider?

Yeah, looks like this is cleanest.

[tyler-yankee]

Previously, mwoehlke-kitware (Matthew Woehlke) wrote…

aside from pending discussion on naming for aptly.

I also just updated the README so it contains the new filename.

[tyler-yankee]

tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release line 107 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, mwoehlke-kitware (Matthew Woehlke) wrote…

Are you asking if we should remove the platform from the file prior to aptly repo add? I don't know... ask someone with more Debian packaging knowledge. 🙂

I don't have knowledge here, but strictly speaking I feel like it should remain unchanged if we want to stick as close as possible to current behavior outside of the intended change (which this is).

[BetsyMcPhail]

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r2, 1 of 2 files at r4, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 4 unresolved discussions, LGTM missing from assignee BetsyMcPhail, commits need curation (https://drake.mit.edu/reviewable.html#curated-commits), missing label for release notes (waiting on @tyler-yankee)

---

tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release line 107 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, tyler-yankee wrote…

I don't have knowledge here, but strictly speaking I feel like it should remain unchanged if we want to stick as close as possible to current behavior outside of the intended change (which this is).

Sorry, my question wasn't clear. Prior to this change, the aptly repo add command used a filename without the platform. With this change, the filename now includes the platform.

[tyler-yankee]

tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release line 107 at r2 (raw file):
From the docs (aptly help repo add):

When importing from directory aptly would do recursive scan looking for all files matching *.[u]deb or *.dsc
patterns. Every file discovered would be analyzed to extract metadata, package would then be created and added
to the database.

If it's searching for *.deb, then having the package name appended before .deb might muck up the search, but I'm not sure without enough experience in the use case. I'll modify it so that the old filename is used for this step just to be safe (that's what I was trying to say above, but wasn't very clear).

[mwoehlke-kitware]

Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r4.
Reviewable status: 2 unresolved discussions, LGTM missing from assignee BetsyMcPhail, commits need curation (https://drake.mit.edu/reviewable.html#curated-commits), missing label for release notes (waiting on @tyler-yankee)

---

tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release line 107 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, tyler-yankee wrote…

From the docs (aptly help repo add):

When importing from directory aptly would do recursive scan looking for all files matching *.[u]deb or *.dsc
patterns. Every file discovered would be analyzed to extract metadata, package would then be created and added
to the database.

If it's searching for *.deb, then having the package name appended before .deb might muck up the search, but I'm not sure without enough experience in the use case. I'll modify it so that the old filename is used for this step just to be safe (that's what I was trying to say above, but wasn't very clear).

We aren't importing from a directory, though, we're giving it a file name. The changed file name reflects that the file name from AWS (and thus, the file on disk after downloading from AWS) changed. The question seems to be whether the name of the .deb on disk matters. The above-quoted documentation makes it sound like the on-disk .deb could be named baz.deb or <sha>.deb and it wouldn't matter. But, sure, if we're paranoid, maybe something like:

readonly remote_filename="drake-dev_${source_version}-1_amd64-${platform}.deb"
readonly local_filename="drake-dev_${source_version}-1_amd64.deb"

curl --fail --location -o "${local_filename} \
  "https://drake-packages.csail.mit.edu/drake/release/${remote_filename}"

[mwoehlke-kitware]

tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release line 104 at r5 (raw file):

    curl --fail --location --remote-name \
      "https://drake-packages.csail.mit.edu/drake/release/${filename_prefix}-${platform}.deb"

This won't change the name of the file on disk... as a result, I'm fairly sure the subsequent aptly invocation will fail.

[mwoehlke-kitware]

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r6.
Reviewable status: 2 unresolved discussions, LGTM missing from assignee BetsyMcPhail, commits need curation (https://drake.mit.edu/reviewable.html#curated-commits), missing label for release notes (waiting on @tyler-yankee)

---

a discussion (no related file):

Previously, tyler-yankee wrote…

I also just updated the README so it contains the new filename.

___ *[`tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release` line 104 at r5](https://reviewable.io/reviews/RobotLocomotion/drake/22471#-OHJjPcA366oUIj9udqg:-OHJkBXvCcNiLFI2A0zU:b-bjpj84) ([raw file](https://github.com/RobotLocomotion/drake/blob/37fe9a0fc889f978c40ebca645375a50c88e3353/tools/release_engineering/dev/push_release#L104)):*

Previously, mwoehlke-kitware (Matthew Woehlke) wrote…

This won't change the name of the file on disk... as a result, I'm fairly sure the subsequent aptly invocation will fail.

Better!