I switched to git so that the commit hash would be available. The tarball could continue to be used, but then the hash would be lost.

the hash is a bit of useless for release builds, we can either set empty or using tap.user.

Generally upstreams think differently about that. Let's just use the checkout.

This is the output from the compiled upstream release, so I think it would make sense to mirror their values

./rqlite-v8.36.3-linux-amd64/rqlite -v
Version v8.36.3, commit 92bcff8e0b50570294c3d13f6b598821ad3daff6, branch master, built on 2024-12-27T20:06:47+0000

It also aligns with what the rqlite creator suggested: #203123 (comment)

I added the commit hash for my own convenience, I agree it's a bit low-level for most folks. In practise it is the tag value e.g. v8.36.1 that is most important to include. So I can go either way whether you want to set it, or just leave it at unknown.

Thanks @otoolep. Since there isn't a strong desire to include the commit hash, we'll switch back to the release tarball but will still include the full version string.

LGTM.

🤖 An automated task has requested bottles to be published to this PR.

Thank you @dtrodrigues