On 03/26/2015 04:39 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: > On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 16:35 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote: >> On 03/26/2015 04:26 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote: > > [...] >>> I don't see any point in storing time zone in the host object, if it's not >>> used >>> for anything meaningful and has to be manually synchronized with the host's >>> actual configured time zone. >> >> It would be mostly used for aiding the HBAC rule creation process, i.e. for >> the >> UX. It would be optional. If you do not fill it, you would have to always >> select the right time zone in when setting the UTC HBAC time, >> >> If you fill the zone, UI could already select the right time zone for you. > > > It will only help to do mistakes, how does the host object get to know > what is the host's timezone ? And in any case you generally create HBAC > rules using groups of hosts, what is the UI gonna do ? Crawl all the > hosts in a group and then ? Average add the most common time zone ?
Search hosts, gather all time zones and list them as choices or simply warn that there are more time zones and Local Time based rule is preferred? :-) > Drop it please :) If there is no one interested in it, we can drop it. Such UX improvement can also be added later, if there is a need. > >> Host's Local Time and UTC time are 2 different approaches how to set the time >> for the HBAC rule. With Local Time type, you would of course not have to deal >> with time zones. I thought this was already cleared out. > > Sorry you confuse me, in which case do you need UTC ? > In case you want to set an absolute time that doesn't change with DST ? I am confused as well. Wasn't it you who expressed the need to have 2 different approaches for HBAC time rules - Local Time and fixed UTC time? Reference: http://www.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/2015-March/msg00158.html -- Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-devel mailing list: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel Contribute to FreeIPA: http://www.freeipa.org/page/Contribute/Code
