acassis commented on PR #3192: URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx-apps/pull/3192#issuecomment-3450910701
> > Just a feedback after dev@ mailing list discussion, thank you for understanding / considering @JianyuWang0623 : > > > > 1. We clearly need to use "Android System Init" naming here and update all kconfig/global variables names to clearly distinguish from current NuttX Init, Android System Init, and SystemV Init (there is sill a change it will show up here one day), maybe others. "system_system" or "system_init" or "init_main" is really confusing and not self-explanatory, does not even point to "android_system_init". I know this is a bit longer but will provide important context and clear separation between completely different functionalities / implementations. > > 2. We need better documentation for this "Android System Init" as well as "Fastboot". These functionalities are welcome, people want to use it, but users / developers ask questions like: Why do we need another init system? What should happen with the previous ones? What does this new init system solve? How this relates to Fastboot? When, why, and how can I use it? What are best use cases with some examples? Please consider approach like explaining and convincing someone who wants to use it but has zero knowledge about the solution. > > Hi @xiaoxiang781216 , @cederom, @acassis, and everyone following the naming discussion for this component, > > Thank you all for your suggestions. As I proposed in the mailing list (archive: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg13730.html), what do you think of the name "NuttX Init"? If there are no objections, I will update the component name as soon as possible. Additionally, if you have time, I would greatly appreciate it if you could review the code and share your feedback. > > The following is a copy of the original email content: > > ``` > Dear All, > > Thank you for your suggestions and ideas. Many of you have pointed out > that the name "init" may be too broad or lead to confusion, and I > believe this concern deserves our attention. > > With reference to Jehudi’s suggestion, I propose naming this new > component "NuttX Init" (abbreviated as "NxInit", with the path: > apps/system/nxinit). This naming follows the style of existing > components, such as nxplayer and nxcamera. > > Regarding names like "Android Init" or similar variations, it is > important to clarify that this component is specifically developed > for NuttX and intended for system initialization. While we have > adopted the Android Init Language among various syntax options, > this is a brand-new implementation—it is not a port or variant of > Android Init. > > I agree that enhancing the recognizability of this component’s name > is necessary, but I suggest incorporating "NuttX" rather than > "Android" into the name to accurately reflect its affiliation and > nature. > > Thank you again for your valuable input. > Jianyu Wang > ``` @JianyuWang0623 as discussed in the mailing list everybody accepted your suggestion to use nxinit instead of init. So please change the directories names to reflect this new name, instead using init. I think in the future, if we have more options to system init, then a menu choice could be created in the menuconfig to select the appropriated initialization system. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
