Best practice when initializing upgradeable contracts (UUPS)

Smart Contracts
1

Assuming I'm developing a contract that implements both the ERC721PausableUpgradeable and ERC721BurnableUpgradeable contracts, is it best practice to call both initialization functions in my contract even though it seems that simply calling pausable should suffice?

For example, here are the respective init codes from the OZ contracts:

// ERC721BurnableUpgradeable
function __ERC721Burnable_init() internal initializer {
    __Context_init_unchained();
    __ERC165_init_unchained();
    __ERC721Burnable_init_unchained();
}

function __ERC721Burnable_init_unchained() internal initializer {}


// ERC721PausableUpgradeable
function __ERC721Pausable_init() internal initializer {
    __Context_init_unchained();
    __ERC165_init_unchained();
    __Pausable_init_unchained();
    __ERC721Pausable_init_unchained();
}

function __ERC721Pausable_init_unchained() internal initializer {}

Should my contract init code be:

function initialize() public initializer {
    __ERC721_init("My Token", "TOKEN");
    __ERC721Pausable_init();
}

or

function initialize() public initializer {
    __ERC721_init("My Token", "TOKEN");
    __ERC721Pausable_init();
    __ERC721Burnable_init()
}

Any why? Thanks in advance.