[Geo] Don't remove project registry records
What does this MR do?
The more I think about it the more I understand this was a bad idea.
- It creates lots of dead tuples on PG
- I saw with my own eyes when a registry record has been deleted while I tried to debug what is happening. Part of the history will be just lost
- This is probably the worst one. The record carries information about two entities independently: repositories and wiki. So it's nonsense to remove the repo sync information just because of something wrong with the wiki
- As Stan has limited the backoff time to some reasonable value (7 days) I don't think we need to worry about too long delay anymore.
Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Why was this MR needed?
Screenshots (if relevant)
Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- Changelog entry added, if necessary
- Documentation created/updated
- API support added
- Tests added for this feature/bug
- Conform by the code review guidelines
- Has been reviewed by a UX Designer
- Has been reviewed by a Frontend maintainer
- Has been reviewed by a Backend maintainer
- Has been reviewed by a Database specialist
EE specific content should be in the top level
- Conform by the merge request performance guides
- Conform by the style guides
- If you have multiple commits, please combine them into a few logically organized commits by squashing them
- Internationalization required/considered
- If paid feature, have we considered GitLab.com plan and how it works for groups and is there a design for promoting it to users who aren't on the correct plan
End-to-end tests pass (
package-qamanual pipeline job)