You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We tried to make info in reports more concise and tidy by saying "upstream" instead of full git repository and used only 8 characters from commit hash to fit more of the commit subject:
HEAD commit: b51594df Merge tag 'docs-5.9-3' of git://[git.lwn.net/linux](http://git.lwn.net/linux)
git tree: upstream
The problem is that we don't accept back in patch testing requests "upstream" as a valid git repository, so users can't copy-paste. The proposal is to not abbreviate and always spell full git repository.
8 characters is considered too short, 12 characters is the standard length.
Need to audit all places we show git repositories and commit hashes.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
8 characters is considered too short, 12 characters is the standard length.
We currently print 12 chars for bug reports and 8 for patch testing requests. I'll update that a bit later -- now we have two pending PRs that affect dashboard, I fear there might be some conflicts if I add the third one.
Request by Alan Stern on a mailing list:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/Yc5rgUo8dyJKX98M@rowland.harvard.edu/
We tried to make info in reports more concise and tidy by saying "upstream" instead of full git repository and used only 8 characters from commit hash to fit more of the commit subject:
The problem is that we don't accept back in patch testing requests "upstream" as a valid git repository, so users can't copy-paste. The proposal is to not abbreviate and always spell full git repository.
8 characters is considered too short, 12 characters is the standard length.
Need to audit all places we show git repositories and commit hashes.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: