This problem (which has more side effects on different sides, not only the Launcher now) was discussed
already yesterday on Discord #iceberg channel with Esteban and Pavel. 
 

The current sha based image file name scheme is not only confusing but has some downsides.
One can not easily remember the SHA or see which image is the latest, or sort from recent

images to older in a folder.

If I understood correctly the reason to (initially) choose sha's in the image name has something
to do with Travis and a discussion between Pavel, Esteban and Guille.

I would vote for using Build numbers again.

We would have several BENEFITS when keeping/returning to build numbers for Pharo 7:
  - we do not change image file names, about box behavior, ... compared to previous Pharo version < 7
    (as we used image build number already in the past)
 - we tag each release as before and see it in Git (we can easily reproduce)
 - the build number easily tells you which image is more recent (as before)
 - we can easily sort when we have several images in a directory
 - a build number is more readable and recognizable by a human (compared to the shas)
 - Pharo is not an "aliens" compared to the rest of the software world as often software
   follows a MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH/BUILDNUMBER scheme (see semver.org)
 - we do not change the order in Launcher (higher numbers at the top to download more recent)
 
According to the discussion with Esteban and Pavel it is technically possible to have build numbers again -
it means to tag each commit again with a build number (we already did this for Pharo 6,
see https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/releases)

The outcome from yesterday was that Pavel will discuss again with Guile on that topic. It would be good if others

could comment on that topic too. Maybe we can return to the known build number scheme
or (if there are problems with that) at least know the arguments why we need to be exotic/different on

this corner in the future.

Thanks

T.