On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 03:58:34PM +0200, m...@adrianschmutzler.de wrote: > > Thanks for the scrutiny! I do have some questions here: is the > > VENDOR/MODEL supposed to match closer to a marketing-friendly/user- > > friendly name, or a developer/low-level name? > > I typically prefer something that the user can read on the device, as > everything else will add to the confusion. > > > Or just some balance of both? Because there's several constraints > > here: > > * The bootloader recognizes compatible="google,gale-v2" -- I don't believe I > > can reliably drop the "v2" there, but I suppose that doesn't require the > > file > > names, etc., to include it > > * There really is no v1 publicly-available; as noted in the commit message, > > I > > believe that was pre-release hardware, and the revisions just stuck around > > through development > > * the "v2" here does *not* mean second generation, as in > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Nest_Wifi#Second_generation > > I don't think we have to care too much about the v1 here; however, if > there is a different "second generation" with the same name, then we > should include a "1st-gen" in the name somewhere, maybe even instead > of the v2 if there is no v3 to be expected for the "1st-gen".
The "second generation" is labeled as "Nest WiFi" or "Google Nest WiFi". I don't know if that's considered the "same" name by the layperson. I could toss in a "1st-gen", if that helps. I doubt there's a "v3" to be expected for 1st-gen. I'll drop the "v2" everywhere but the 'compatible' property. > The Wiki article is not entirely precise here, so is the gale-v2 the > "first generation" in the nest article Yes. > or is there actually a 1st and > 2nd generation of that Nest devices and gale something even different? No, Gale is the thing called "first generation" there. Google is excellent at naming things :D I believe the 2 products here are named "Google WiFi" and "Nest WiFi" (where Nest is part of Google...) -- there's some shift to using the "Nest" brand for this type of hardware, I guess. I presume the Wikipedia authors have retroactivey renamed the page to "Google Nest WiFi" to follow the latest branding, even if the first generation had no such "Nest" marketing. 1st generation = Gale = Google WiFi 2nd generation = Nest WiFi (by Google!) > > * "WiFi" doesn't really make for a good MODEL on its own, although it's OK > > when paired with the VENDOR. But I still preferred sticking the codename > > (Gale) around, since that's the unambiguous way hackers can recognize the > > model. > > > > What do you think? Should I try to keep the keywords "google", "wifi", and > > "gale" in all of the config, image, and DTS name? And I'll avoid the "v2" > > labeling (and DEVICE_VARIANT) outside of "compatible", because I think that > > would be misleading. > > If you call this gale, the question is how you proceed with the nest > series then. Will you switch to marketing-based "nest" then, or will > you use the internal name though the user will read something > different on the device? (I have no plans for Nest WiFi support, FWIW.) I could see it going either way. I guess one thing that trips me up: suppose I call this "Device/google_wifi" (and Nest WiFi -> "Device/nest_wifi"), then the DTS file comes out as Google WiFi -> qcom-ipq4019-wifi.dts Nest WiFi -> qcom-ipqXXXX-wifi.dts That seems...pretty obtuse to me. Is that a case where I override the auto-naming for the DTS, and call them "qcom-ipq4019-google-wifi.dts" and "qcom-ipqXXXX-nest-wifi.dts"? Or I could use hyphens, so the DTS derivation is nicer (Device/google-wifi, or even Device/google_google-wifi -- either of those should produce ...-google-wifi.dts)? > Unfortunately, this stuff is never easy to decide. Personally, I > always lean towards what's printed on the thing. Brian _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel