Fixes example service name example consistency

[AndreMiras]

It makes it easier to understand by using the initial example with
myservice as service name.

[ghost]

Looks like a useful change to me, in the context of the uses in the other parts of the file

[ghost]

One minor thing I'm just noticing: the service class is named myservice above, but the option is --service Myservice - the text mentions something about this needing the first letter upper case, so that's probably correct. Just wanted to ask to be sure: is that case difference intentional?

[AndreMiras]

Thanks for the review. Actually the option is --service=myservice:/path/to/myservice.py as stated in the current version of the document so name in the param is myservice. Then that gets "turned to" a dynamic class that way (pseudo Python code):

service = 'myservice' # comes from the `--service` param
f'Service{service.title()}' # then the dynamic class is the following -> ServiceMyservice

Not sure if it's clear?

[ghost]

Ah. I think I was confused because I misread the text, I kind of thought I should specify --service again with the first letter uppercase. Maybe a minor change like this would work better:

Previously:

the name of the service is ServiceMyservice, in which Myservice is the identifier passed to the --service argument with the first letter upper case.

Suggestion:

the name of the service is ServiceMyservice, in which Myservice is the identifier that was previously passed to the --service argument, but with the first letter upper case.

But of course that's kind of unrelated to the change in the pull request, which is definitely an improvement in any case

[AndreMiras]

Thank you @Jonast I've adopted your suggestion 🍻