We should be super clear on the naming here, so potentially we should name this "koji_task_id"

This is not that easy. In case we will support rebuilding modules (the code for that already exists in Freshmaker, it just not deployer anywhere), it will actually be MBS build ID. The meaning of that variable depends on ArtifactBuild's type.

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 3:14 AM, Jan Kalu=C5=BEa pagure@pagure.io wrote:

jkaluza added a new comment to an issue you are following:
This is not that easy. In case we will support rebuilding modules (the co= de for that already exists in Freshmaker, it just not deployer anywhere), i= t will actually be MBS build ID. The meaning of that variable depends on Ar= tifactBuild's type.

Or we can give more information in the name, something like
external_build_id or external_task_id, which would be helpful, at
least, to clarity it points to a build or task inside an external
service. But, my suggestion cannot solves the root reason, as Jan
said, whatever the name is, it should be understood with the
ArtifactBuild's type together.

On the other hand, we can keep this name because there is already
comment for the build_id attribute inside ArtifactBuild model.

--=20
Regards,
Chenxiong Qi

Unfortunately at this point, changing this attribute would be disruptive for any other services that integrate with Freshmaker. Since there's no real functional value in making this change, let's drop this.