"Back-up on mount" combined with "time scheduling"

[Christophe]

Hello,
I am glad to welcome the very helpful "back-up on mount" feature but I have a small concern about the way it is designed when it talks about its combination with the scheduling feature.
My current backup plan is set to be run every week, twice a week, at a specific time.
As the "back-up on connect" feature is available, I'd like to replace the "time" trigger by the "connect" trigger in order to get the following backup plan: every week, twice a week, on back-up mount, whatever the time.
Unfortunately, I have been unable to disable the "time" in the out-of-the-box scheduling settings.
Any advice is welcome or, could be considered as a possible coming enhancement.
Thank you!

[dnanian]

The two options are independent. If you want to back up only on connect, then don't check the top option...

[Christophe]

Originally Posted by dnanian

The two options are independent. If you want to back up only on connect, then don't check the top option...

I know that, Dave. As mentioned above, I'd like to combine them and set up my backups twice a week (on wednesday + sunday) whenever in the day and just triggered by the mounting of the backup volume.

[dnanian]

So that's fine. Again, they're independent settings, so set both and off you go.

[Christophe]

Originally Posted by dnanian

So that's fine. Again, they're independent settings, so set both and off you go.

I know that both can be combined but what I want to do is to schedule the days (within the week) without having to schedule the time (within the day).
Indeed, I would like the event "volume mounted" to replace the event "due time" in order to launch the backup when the volume is connected, on specific days and whatever the time is (meaning, whenever in the day).
Unfortunately, when the parameter "on the following schedule" is active, the parameter "start copying at" can not be disabled separately. That's my concern.
Thank you for your help!

[dnanian]

I kind of see what you mean here, but I just don't see the additional complexity involved here as paying off in a generally worthwhile way...