From: dominick.grift@gmail.com (Dominick Grift)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 20:02:33 +0100
Subject: [refpolicy] systemd policy
In-Reply-To: <52D401D3.5040900@redhat.com>
References: <5992094.YlEUt0BCZP@russell.coker.com.au>
	<20140112131841.71f6da37@fornost.bigon.be>
	<5347508.kSSh66cgIv@russell.coker.com.au> <52D401D3.5040900@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <1389639753.20228.8.camel@x220.localdomain>
To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com
List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com

On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 10:10 -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:

> I rely on Dominick and Miroslav to get Fedora changes/fixes upstream.
> 
> Could you guys take care of getting systemd policy upstream.
> 

We rely on Chris

I recently submitted a small patch just to get the ball rolling but it
did not get any reply.

Other than that, Fedora is also to blame to an extent.

It would help if Fedora also considers things, also for its own benefit.

For example:

Fedora recently remove the init_run_daemon(unconfined_t) from her
policy, while i submitted a solution here on this list that i believe is
sustainable but it was ignore without any comments.

I know Fedora does not have to , or wants to support other init systems
but reference policy does not have that luxury. By going your own way, i
believe you're shutting the door to alternative init systems in Fedora
and you decrease chances of getting stuff up streamed.

Now with every commit Fedora does i have to worry about this because i
know Fedora seems to not care about other scenarios

And then there is the issue that i am taking a bit of distance from the
community. I have to focus on other things unfortunately, but ces't la
vie

_______________________________________________
> refpolicy mailing list
> refpolicy at oss.tresys.com
> http://oss.tresys.com/mailman/listinfo/refpolicy