Option to uninstall an application when a user or device falls out of scope of the collection
This is a buggy, Would we like the option to have ' Uninstall Application when Resource falls out of scope of this collection' when an application is deployed to a collection, this would save us having to create 2 collections ( install and uninstall) and to deployments. This would save SO much time and reduce the complicity of application management.
Since we just saw an e2e hack-a-thon demo on this; updating the status.
Iain Fairbairn commented
You do have to be careful with these kinds of features. I have seen some pretty horrible incidents where people use exclusion collections as a dead mans switch style approach to avoiding having something install or trigger uninstalls (even worse they use direct memberships for exclusion collections....). I am not arguing against the feature at all and would support its inclusion as an option however I would suggest, 1) ensure it is never the default setting to uninstall when out of scope. 2). perhaps have a tooltip and/or popup "are you sure?" type dialogue when someone chooses to switch this on.
Ionuț Maxim commented
I totally agree with HoustonAU, this would be a very neat feature.
While this can already be accomplished through creative collections, I think an integrated and supported way to do this would be much better.
If you need to do this now you can create a collection that includes all devices with the software installed but exclude devices that are in the 'Install' collection, then just do an 'uninstall' deployment to that second collection.
It works but is a bit of a pain to configure for every application.
Would be preferable to simply have a tick box on the deployment to say 'Uninstall when item is out of scope' or something similar.
I also disagree with 'Anonymous', all configuration management software is 'dangerous' if you don't know what you are doing.
I also think that this would be a very bad idea. There are multitude of scenarios where a resource might get removed from a collection, one of them being accidentally removing it from the console.
I love this idea. It would be an big step from an task-based to an status-based deployment solution.
Mike Compton commented
@Mirko Colemberg - I DO NOT feel that it is the System Center team's role, to NOT write code in case an admin uses it incorrectly. They do not have the role of policing how we administer our estates.
If they took that approach, we would not have any OSD solution, in case people accidentally deploy a client OS to their server estate.
If you regularly accidentally delete computer objects A) change the permissions of your role to prevent this and B) be more careful!
i fully support this action. Uninstall is a nightmare !
Law YT commented
I fully support this as currently have to developed a customized script on the client machine to monitor policy and once detected being removed then only trigger the uninstall of the application. This getting more complex when using application model especial optional deployment.
Steven John Cuthill commented
Agreed it can be a powerful feature but with some improvements in how the system can remember object ID collection memberships of the object is deleted would make some of this a less of a concern. Good change controls would provent more. It's just to complex to set up an uninstall competed to other vendors and group policy.
that's what SMS 1.2 (or 2.0, don't remember) had, and it was responsible for uninstalling unintentionally applications. Dangerous.
Mirko Colemberg commented
i thinnk this is not a god idea, in case some admin delete a client object in the konsole this object will loose all direct meberships of all collections and in this case the computernwill uninstall all software. this could be difficult.