Closed cmacq2 closed 8 years ago
Any thoughts on this?
Looks good to me. I might be inclined to call the br_output_basename
function br_image_basename
instead.
I thought of that but decided against it when I wrote the code because:
custom-report.sh
for filenames of arbitrary output artifactsbrp_image_name
which reflects the actual image base name. It seemed a good idea to preserve the distinction/avoid confusion in the function name.Isn't brp_image_name
the full name (including file extension)? Also, since the "output" name can be specified with the -I
option (advertised as image base name), I think it makes more sense to use br_image_basename
unless you are planning on making it more generic by updating the docs and maybe changing the parameter to -o
.
Isn't brp_image_name the full name (including file extension)?
Correct.
I think it makes more sense to use br_image_basename
Updated the PR accordingly.
Introduce a 'reports' directory to aggregate reports generated via custom-report.sh
With this change custom-report.sh instances will have a well-defined location to put their reports (example:
$(br_report_dir)/your_report_name_here.txt
), and brickstrap has a well-defined location to delete, namely$(br_report_dir)
itself.Introduce the
br_output_basename
function so reporting scripts have a well defined template basename for report file names.