Hi Julien, Julien Grall writes:
> Hi Stefano, > > On 10/2/19 2:05 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >> On Tue, 24 Sep 2019, Julien Grall wrote: >>> The documentation is using a mix of ARM (old) and Arm (new). To stay >>> consistent, use only the new name. >> >> Thank you for the patch, it must have been "not fun" to write this >> patch. >> >> However, let me suggest a radical maybe controversial idea. What about >> keeping "ARM" instead of switching? There are several advantages: it is >> easier to grep, no need to worry about case-sensitivity. It is what >> people are used to, and what still use (in my experience at conference >> and at work.) Would it make sense to ignore Arm's marketing and keep the >> old "ARM" nomenclature? > > Pretty much all the new documentation on Arm website are now using Arm > (the spec is now called Arm Arm). This confuses me, because I believed that second "Arm" stands for Architecture Reference Manual. >> >> If not, I'd suggest to also replace "arm" with "Arm" so that at least >> with have consistent cases everywhere. But then the pathnames would >> remain xen/arch/arm, leading to sentences such as: >> >> (non-zImage)" protocol described in arm/Booting. >> There are no exception on 64-bit Arm. >> >> With "arm" and "ARM" the distinction was clear between pathnames and >> text (at least to me.) With "arm" and "Arm", I know it is silly but it >> kind of bothers me :-) > > How do you deal with Xilinx then? ;) > >> >> I am not going to insist on this one though. > > This is quite similar to a company renaming itself (or got acquired > and the name completely disappear) but in a less radical way. Would > you still keep the old name company in your documentation and/or > mixing the both? BTW, this if what happened with Freescale/NXP. Linux and U-Boot still use "freescale" even for i.MX8 chips. -- Volodymyr Babchuk at EPAM _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
