On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 04:07:04PM +0100, Milosz Wasilewski wrote:
On 19 September 2017 at 15:00, Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org wrote:
I think the problem is that you are trying to use the internal name that bits of LKFT uses as a display name for end users and that's not going to end well - you probably need at least some blanks and some splitting things up.
I'm still waiting for a proposal what and how to change. As I wrote, I have no problem changing things.
Personally for:
lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe: no regressions found in build v4.4.87-32-gb8c205d85576
I'd have something like:
stable-rc/linux-v4.4.y: no regressions found for v4.4.87-32-gb8c205d85576 on OE
off the top of my head, though other people might want to bikeshed that a bit more.
from kernelci: lsk/linux-linaro-lsk-v4.4-android How is that different to what lkft sends? How am I supposed to know what 'lsk' means without opening the email?
You're thinking about that the wrong way round - kernelci is displaying names from the tree it's working with, not making up new names for things which don't otherwise exist.
Right, so because you know that 'lsk' means everyone else know as well. The git repo is
I don't know where that one came from specifically but I suspect you'll find most of the names come from what people ask for ("could you add my $NAME tree at $URL" or similar).
https://git.linaro.org/kernel/linux-linaro-stable.git. How does this map to 'lsk'? It's exactly the same story. 'lsk' is kernelci's internal project name and this somehow is OK while lkft's internal project names are not.
It's not just that leading bit, it's the whole name that's different with what LKFT is doing especially the attempt to put the tree, branch and userspace into the same unbroken string.