This reverts commit rB31d80ddeaad, and fixes issue introduced in rBf0b4aa5d59e3
by not doing the 'reversed dependency check' in resync case.
Rational here are:
* Supporting reversed dependency in a reliable, coinsistent way in
resync is likely to be a nightmare, if even possible at all.
* Needs for such reversed dependency in resync should be close to 0% of
cases, as long as users remain reasonable with their organization of
their assets (it could only become a problem in extreme bad practice
and corner cases, like a geometry object being added as a child of a
rig in a completely new, otherwise un-overridden collection, in
partial override context).
This decision may need to be re-evaluated later in case we go more
towards a very highly partial-override workflow, but even then I would
expect current solution to work fine in all reasonable use cases.
acdc043c30