Pavel Machek wrote: > And what is the cost really? The patches need to be cleaned up,anyway, so...? > A higher priority is getting everyone (Google, OEMs, and the community) to settle on a common tree, from which we all base our ongoing work. Then we won't have this ongoing need to clean up anything. The path of least effort towards that goal is to stick with the names we already have for the existing code. At some point in the future, when the code in question isn't so volatile, then we can mutually consider whether renaming creates more pain than it eliminates. Since by that time we'll all be comfortable with the mapping between the fish and commercial product names, I doubt there will be any motivation to do the additional work. I really don't have a problem with the current, aquatic-vertebrate-based convention so long as once a trade name is announced, we note that somewhere in the source code so that LXR et. al can find it. We're all familiar with variable name abstractions like "'x' is the valve position before the error term is added", I don't see why we can't deal with platform names in the same way. Google calls it mahimahi, HTC calls it Nexus One. <devil's advocate> If we do a code rename, should it be "nexusone", "nexus_one", "nexus-one", "nexusOne", "NexusOne", or what? </devil's advocate> As for new platforms, the one who writes the first line of code always gets to pick the name. That shouldn't be news to anyone here. b.g. -- Bill Gatliff Embedded systems training and consulting http://billgatliff.com bgat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
