Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> The "maintain >> their clone" certainly should include running periodic maintenance >> tasks without them having to worry about it. It feels like this is >> calling for an explicit "disable periodic maintenance tasks in this >> repository" option to help these esoteric environments that disable >> cron-like system services, while keeping the default safer, >> i.e. fail loudly when the periodic maintenance tasks that the users >> expect to happen cannot be enabled, or something. >> >> Perhaps I am not the primary audience, but hmph, I have a feeling >> that this is not exactly going into a healthy direction. > > Here, we are in an environment where background maintenance is > unavailable in an unexpected way. If that feature is not available > to the user, should they not get the benefits of the others? That is not what I was saying. I just have expected to see a way for the user to give scalar an explicit "I understand that periodic maintenance does not happen in this repository" consent, instead of demoting an error detection for everybody to a warning that users will just ignore.
