I don't even know how to respond to this since the expectation is completely reasonable? As is, someone is going to lose data. It's not a question of "if" but "when". The .qtr file serves as a map linking to artifacts based on the directory element. What we're saying here is that the directory element is not the single source of truth since it can be (and will be) overwritten by any particular artifact link. When a user takes action to (for any number of reasons) change the location of where these artifacts are maintained, the OLD location is STILL very much a valid asset that must be preserved. This is not intuitive and can only be described as an anti-pattern.
I don't even know how to respond to this since the expectation is completely reasonable? As is, someone is going to lose data. It's not a question of "if" but "when". The .qtr file serves as a map linking to artifacts based on the directory element. What we're saying here is that the directory element is not the single source of truth since it can be (and will be) overwritten by any particular artifact link. When a user takes action to (for any number of reasons) change the location of where these artifacts are maintained, the OLD location is STILL very much a valid asset that must be preserved. This is not intuitive and can only be described as an anti-pattern.