On 24-02-22, 09:25, Lukasz Luba wrote: > Our partners had a lot of issues with EM+EAS, because they were not > aware of the internals of EM and limitations. > > We've started to name two types of EM: 'advanced' and 'simple'. > The 'simple' is the one which causes issues. Now when we contact with > partners we ask if they use 'simple' EM and see some issues in EAS. > This is a needed clarification and naming convention that we use. > > Here the paragraph name is stressing the fact explicitly that > from today we have the option to provide real power measurements using > DT and it will be the 'advanced' EM. I understand the background now, and since I am part of the same community I can appreciate that. But being a maintainer, I have to say that when we look at something from Upstream's point of view, we may have to neglect/ignore the terminology used in downstream.
