bug#20943: 25.0.50; Dired buffers are not always auto-reverted

[Mark Karpov]

You're saying:

> Why is such a different logic a good idea?  If the user requests
> auto-reverts in a remote directory, she should get what she asked for,
> IMO.  It would be confusing to have different results depending on
> whether the directory is local or not.

>From this I understand that you are in favor of “dynamic”
auto-revert-mode for remote directories. This makes sense, if user
chooses to auto-revert Dired buffers, ‘she should get what she asked
for’ — that's right.

> But the price is the need to re-read remote directories, and we want
> to avoid that price, if possible.

But this is not possible. This contradicts with the previous
quotation. Let it be re-read. User can disable it anyway. If revertion
of buffers is slow, chances are user won't even enable it if he works
with remote directories. If it's slow/better to be avoided, don't use
it, use good ol' Dired without auto-revert magic. If you're expecting
Dired buffers to be “dynamic”, this is your choice — you will have to
re-read directories more often. It's as simple as that (at least for
me).