From: jason@perfinion.com (Jason Zaman) Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 18:11:08 +0400 Subject: [refpolicy] [PATCH] Introduce init_manage_service_template interface In-Reply-To: References: <1431642524-14781-1-git-send-email-jason@perfinion.com> <5559E1D1.6090107@tresys.com> <20150518132133.GB22574@meriadoc.Home> Message-ID: <20150518141108.GA24890@meriadoc.Home> To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 03:27:48PM +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote: > What about "operate"? or direct, govern, handle. I think operate is a bit better tho since operator is one of the standard unix accounts. Chris, do you want me to re-do the patch with any of them in particular or do you want to search and replace on your end? -- Jason > On May 18, 2015 3:22 PM, "Jason Zaman" <[1]jason@perfinion.com> 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 > [2]refpolicy at oss.tresys.com > [3]http://oss.tresys.com/mailman/listinfo/refpolicy > > References > > 1. mailto:jason at perfinion.com > 2. mailto:refpolicy at oss.tresys.com > 3. http://oss.tresys.com/mailman/listinfo/refpolicy