Hey, I've got a crazy idea – what if we just lock the group inside a safe and bury it in the backyard? That's gotta be the ultimate protection against deletion!
A might work, but it sounds a bit too simple. I mean, who doesn't love a good deactivation process? It's like putting the group in time-out instead of deleting it.
D all the way! Running tasks assigned to the group? That's like a built-in protection against accidental deletion. Guess they really don't want you to mess with that group.
I'm going with C. Having the group be a subgroup of another active group seems like a pretty solid way to prevent deletion. Keeps things nice and nested, you know?
Option B sounds like the way to go. If there's a process that references the group, it would make sense that it can't be deleted. Gotta love those dependencies!
Option B sounds like the way to go. If there's a process that references the group, it would make sense that it can't be deleted. Gotta love those dependencies!
Option B sounds like the way to go. If there's a process that references the group, it would make sense that it can't be deleted. Gotta love those dependencies!
Flo
1 months agoLuis
2 days agoShad
3 days agoNakisha
15 days agoMendy
16 days agoEliz
1 months agoLinsey
2 months agoCathrine
1 months agoFelix
1 months agoMatilda
2 months agoTheron
15 days agoLashanda
1 months agoLinwood
1 months agoGeorgeanna
2 months agoBarabara
2 months agoVallie
2 days agoBettye
8 days agoIndia
12 days agoMargret
18 days agoMicah
22 days agoAja
24 days agoTiera
2 months agoMarisha
2 months agoLinwood
3 months ago