Add +plugins suffix to package name to prevent confusion what is incl…

[Rot127]

…uded.

Your checklist for this pull request

• I've read the guidelines for contributing to this repository
• I made sure to follow the project's coding style
• I've updated the documentation with the relevant information (if needed)

Detailed description

Test plan (required)

Closing issues

[notxvilka]

LGTM. Though we probably need also a PR for the site as well.

[karliss]

Related #3507

[karliss]

I am starting to get some doubts about renaming. Changing the windows .zip name is fine, but on linux it's the name of the ~executable app. Not sure about macOS whether it will change only .dmg which would be fine or the .app as well.

If only .dmg but not .app can be renamed, I guess I am fine with ugly appimage name.

[karliss]

[karliss]

I would prefer explicit list, maybe in the plugin section. It's not obvious which ones are considered "All maintained plugins", And the plugins repo https://github.com/rizinorg/cutter-plugins contains quite a few community plugins labelled "maintained" so phrase "all maintained" can be quite misleading.

[Rot127]

Made your changes.
Test release so we can check it: https://github.com/Rot127/cutter/releases/tag/test-release-pkg-plugins

[Rot127]

@karliss

If only .dmg but not .app can be renamed, I guess I am fine with ugly appimage name.

This would be inconsistent though. People might come to the release page and wonder if only the MacOS version contains all plugins.
If you don't want to change the executable file names (totally fine), we can also go with a note on the release page, the docs and webpage alone.
Basically like the note in the README.

[karliss]

People might come to the release page and wonder if only the MacOS version contains all plugins.

Where did that come from? By .app I am referring to the macos app within the dmg not the appimage. And I already told that I am fine with ugly appimage name as long as for macos and windows it only changes external package name not the executable within. It was kind of long and ugly already before the changes.

[Rot127]

Ah sorry. I misread you. I'll change the names again and see if the executables actually change as well.