My memory is fuzzy on this but the problem as I recall it is we want to avoid at all costs someone accidentally erasing their infrastructure.

There is some debate about whether this is the right approach.

Arguments for:

RPM is the admins tool to manage content on the system. If an admin does rpm -e for a package, the
system should be left clean. If a user gets an ipa install into a broken state, rpm -e should be the "nuke it from orbit" option, leaving the system clean such that an rpm install and ipa install will succeed.

Arguments against: The data that ipa manages is vital to an organization. Deleting it could be disasterous.

apt has a concept of purge, which removes not just files managed by the package, but also of the files produced by running the programs of that package. ipa-server-install --uninstall coupled with running rpm -e ipa-server will result in a clean system. The problem is that users may not perform that sequence, and be left with orphaned file on the system.

Thus, perhaps the correct final state is to have a script ipa-server-purge which is left behind when the ipa-server is uninstalled, that contains information about how to clean up the rest of the files on the system.

This RFE was evaluated and will not be implemented.

It is left as an exercise to the user to properly clean up their installation prior to removing packages. This may not meet expectations but is the safest course of action.