From: sven.vermeulen@siphos.be (Sven Vermeulen) Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 15:27:48 +0200 Subject: [refpolicy] [PATCH] Introduce init_manage_service_template interface In-Reply-To: <20150518132133.GB22574@meriadoc.Home> References: <1431642524-14781-1-git-send-email-jason@perfinion.com> <5559E1D1.6090107@tresys.com> <20150518132133.GB22574@meriadoc.Home> Message-ID: To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com What about "operate"? On May 18, 2015 3:22 PM, "Jason Zaman" wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 08:57:53AM -0400, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote: > > On 5/14/2015 6:28 PM, Jason Zaman wrote: > > > This is to be used where a role needs to start and stop a service. It > > > centralizes all the rules for redhat < 6 sysvinit that were used in the > > > _admin interfaces. The rules for other inits will be added later. > > > > I'm ok with this set, though I'm trying to decide if this is the right > > name for this template. I'm not sure if we should overload "manage" > > since it already is create/read/write/delete on files, dirs, etc. > > I would be quite willing to change the name if there is a better one. I > agree "manage" is overloaded. Although "start" doesnt work either since > the template would be for stopping / status / etc as well. > > Is there any other verb that is used to in this context we can use > instead? > > -- Jason > _______________________________________________ > refpolicy mailing list > refpolicy at oss.tresys.com > http://oss.tresys.com/mailman/listinfo/refpolicy > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://oss.tresys.com/pipermail/refpolicy/attachments/20150518/a6b55f4a/attachment.html