From: jason@perfinion.com (Jason Zaman)
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 17:43:45 +0400
Subject: [refpolicy] [PATCH] Introduce init_manage_service_template
 interface
In-Reply-To: <555C85C8.3000704@tresys.com>
References: <1431642524-14781-1-git-send-email-jason@perfinion.com>
	<5559E1D1.6090107@tresys.com>
	<20150518132133.GB22574@meriadoc.Home>
	<CAPzO=NyGuEQRiS=B4uhCTpjHYT6gew-yf77+JDsfgx2oWhGKKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20150518141108.GA24890@meriadoc.Home>
	<555C85C8.3000704@tresys.com>
Message-ID: <20150520134345.GA21598@meriadoc.Home>
To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com
List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 09:02:00AM -0400, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote:
> On 5/18/2015 10:11 AM, Jason Zaman wrote:
> > 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?
> 
> I was thinking about verbs for these interfaces in general, and obvious
> ones are:
> 
> * start
> * stop
> * <start and stop: operate, direct, govern, handle?>
> 
> Then it occurred to me, why not do something like startstop like we do
> sendrecv?  It's ugly, but clearly indicates what is happening.

That makes a lot of sense and would not have any misunderstandings. It's
not really that ugly apart from init_startstop_service_template is pretty
long. Do we need / want the _template in it?

-- 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
> 
> 
> -- 
> Chris PeBenito
> Tresys Technology, LLC
> www.tresys.com | oss.tresys.com