update prerelease check to allow standard release

[daeho-ro]

When a formula or cask is written on the github_prerelease_allowlist.json, prerelease is allowed but interestingly it prohibits regular release. I think this should be also allowed too.

Here is an example.

• utm@beta 4.6.4 homebrew-cask#193893

utm@beta cask has a version 4.6.1 but utm is now 4.6.3. On my thought, beta branch should always have more up to date version than the normal branch and so it should be 4.6.3 not 4.6.1.

---

• Have you followed the guidelines in our Contributing document?
• Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same change?
• Have you added an explanation of what your changes do and why you'd like us to include them?
• Have you written new tests for your changes? Here's an example.
• Have you successfully run brew style with your changes locally?
• Have you successfully run brew typecheck with your changes locally?
• Have you successfully run brew tests with your changes locally?

---

[bevanjkay]

I think this can be dependent on the release ethos of the individual product. There are definitely cask, such as utm-beta where pre-release and standard releases should be allowed. But there are also cases where we want the allowlist audit to fail for a non-pre-release.

I'm not certain on the best way forward, if we can use a different keyword, or if we need a different allowlist. But I don't think adjusting the current methodology is the right way forward, we probably need to maintain the status quo and have a modified version of handling the alternative.

[daeho-ro]

Version allow string all itself really should be all, I think. If it really depends on the pre-release only, then it can be somehow like pre or any other string. But this may break some formula or cask and so we can keep all and add another one to allow utm@beta case.

[daeho-ro]

I have added a commit just for discussion and it will be squashed later or drop the PR. Any suggestions and opinions are welcome!

[bevanjkay]

If I remember correctly the "all" relates to pinning the skip to a specific version number, not a pre-release type.

[carlocab]

See also #18488

[daeho-ro]

Let us consider the chrome as an example. There is no need to provide a stable release for the canary channel because it can be installed separately. In this case, of course, prerelease exceptions are not required. However, for some packages like utm, it cannot be installed stable and beta at the same time. So, I thought it is more reasonable to provide the latest version whatever it is pre-release or stable for the beta channel because we can install one channel only.

This is the reason why I have submitted this changes and want to introduce any again, thanks @carlocab for the previous discussion.