make 5.13 kernel the default branch

[pdp7]

@tekkamanninja There is not much value directing people to the 5.10 branch as the default ( https://github.com/starfive-tech/linux/tree/fedora-vic-7100_5.10.6). I believe the only reason you are still using 5.10 is because Fedora 33 was 5.10? Akira (@mcd500) has been repackaging the Fedora image to have the 5.13 kernel branch from @esmil and that is working well.

Now that @esmil can push directly to starfive-tech/linux/esmil_starlight and it stays in sync with esmil/linux/starlight I think it would make sense to make the default branch https://github.com/starfive-tech/linux/tree/esmil_starlight

Alternatively, a new branch such as jh7100-5.13 could be created from esmil_starlight and could be made default jh7100-5.13

[esmil]

Yeah, if the starlight branch is made the default, let's call it something better than esmil_starlight. How about just starlight so it doesn't matter if you pull from github.com/starfive-tech/linux or github.com/esmil/linux, and it's just "the starlight branch".

I don't mind jh7100-5.13 either. I'll just push to the starlight branch to that name until 5.14-rc1 is out and ill switch to jh7100-5.14 and do jh7100-5.13 like I'm doing starlight-5.12.y now.

[pdp7]

Yeah, if the starlight branch is made the default, let's call it something better than esmil_starlight. How about just starlight so it doesn't matter if you pull from github.com/starfive-tech/linux or github.com/esmil/linux, and it's just "the starlight branch".

I don't mind jh7100-5.13 either. I'll just push to the starlight branch to that name until 5.14-rc1 is out and ill switch to jh7100-5.14 and do jh7100-5.13 like I'm doing starlight-5.12.y now.

@esmil thanks for the comment. Good point that soon we will have 5.14-rc1.

How about renaming esmil_starlight to jh7100-devel and making that the default?

When we get ready to start rebasing for a proper patch series for git send-email, then 'jh7100-upstreaming' could be created from 'jh7100-devel'.

Regarding 'starlight', it would be best to avoid using that term on its own as 'beaglev-starlight' should be used instead. However, that is a bit of a long string, so it might be best just to use the term jh7100 instead. The exception being board specific term such as the board device tree where we will call that 'jh7100-beaglev-starlight'

[esmil]

jh7100-devel is fine by me. Alternatively we could call it just beaglev, so you check out the beaglev branch and do beaglev_defconfig etc. Thus postponing the naming problem until the beaglev-moonlight board comes out :-P

[pdp7]

@esmil I like your suggestion of beaglev as that is a simpler branch name than jh7100-devel. The description can be that it is our downstream patches for the BeagleV Starlight JH7100 on top of the current mainline.

I created a new branch based on esmil_starlight:
https://github.com/starfive-tech/linux/tree/beaglev

If we all like that name, then I can start updating various links from 'esmil_starlight' to 'beaglev'. We won't delete 'esmil_starlight' for awhile so it should give plenty of time to let people know they should update any configurations such as meta-riscv.

[esmil]

Cool. I'll just push to both esmil_starlight and beaglev next time then.

[esmil]

The defconfig is now also called beaglev_defconfig and it has CONFIG_LOCALVERSION="-beaglev".