David Kupka wrote:
> On 29/11/16 18:10, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>> Still, bug reports and users' complaints is the only external measure we
>> have. There are close to nothing in complaints about NTP functionality,
>> other than requests to support chronyd and a better discover of existing
>> NTP setups. I don't think that requires dramatic action like removal of
>> NTP support at all.
>>
> 
> As Petr already pointed out, since Fedora 16 chronyd is enabled by
> default and ipa-client-install doesn't configure time synchronization
> when chronyd is enabled.
> 
> I believe that majority of users haven't used '--force-ntpd' and since
> it still worked they haven't filed any ticket.
> 
> IMO in this case no bug reports means no users rather than no bugs or
> requests.
> 
> Unfortunately, this is just my guess and AFAIK we don't have any data
> from users showing how they use FreeIPA.

For argument's sake, let's say NTP configuration in the client is
dropped and managed by the OS or other administrators.

What implication does this have for configuring NTP server on masters?
Would that be stopped as well? What about existing installs?

I don't believe there is a precedence for removing a service from IPA.

rob

-- 
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

Reply via email to