[tomoyo-dev-en 251] Re: About supporting policy namespace.

アーカイブの一覧に戻る

Jamie Nguyen jamie****@tomoy*****
Sat Jun 4 19:23:57 JST 2011


Toshiharu Harada wrote:
> How I wish I can say "yes" to "restart_domain"...

Hehe I had a funny feeling that we weren't finished with this discussion yet :-)


> But I can't this time. My inner soul tells me that "to restart
> something, you need to start it first" and I cannot resist it.
> (sorry, Jamie)
>
> If I have to choose from the above two, my vote is "reset_domain".
> Resetting domain makes sense since domain is already there.
> To accept "restart_domain", I would like to claim for
> "start_domain".

Maybe some example definitions could help:

reset:
1) to reset a guage or dial or counter to zero
2) to reset a broken bone

restart:
1) to restart an engine that is not currently running
2) to restart a computer which is still running (first stop and then start)

start:
1) to start an engine that is not currently running

I dislike "start_domain" because it implies that something has
stopped, when in fact it is more of a transition. In fact, the same
applies to "restart_domain".

I suppose you could say that we are "resetting" the domain to zero
(similar to resetting a counter), where zero means it becomes the top
level domain (just like nothing comes before zero), and where top
level domains are given their own exception/domain/profile policy. In
a sense, when we create a new namespace, we are also resetting
exception/domain/profile policy to their original values as well
(where original=almost empty). So "reset_domain" actually sounds quite
reasonable to me.




More information about the tomoyo-dev-en mailing list
アーカイブの一覧に戻る