From: cpebenito@tresys.com (Christopher J. PeBenito)
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 08:33:02 -0400
Subject: [refpolicy] [PATCH] Introduce init_manage_service_template
	interface
In-Reply-To: <20150520134345.GA21598@meriadoc.Home>
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>
	<20150520134345.GA21598@meriadoc.Home>
Message-ID: <555F21FE.8030006@tresys.com>
To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com
List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com

On 5/20/2015 9:43 AM, Jason Zaman wrote:
> 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?

It's not actually creating any types, thus it's not technically a
template, so you can skip the _template.

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