<html> <head> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> </head> <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> I'm not convinced that named sync mode is a good approach. I doubt it will ever be anything besides (additive|mirror) which really boils down to mirror (or not). Perhaps the reasoning behind a named mode is that it is potentially more extensible in that the API won't be impacted when a new mode is needed. The main problem with this approach is that the mode names are validated and interpreted in multiple places. Adding another mode will require coordinated changes in both the core and most plugins. Generally, I'm an advocate of named things like modes and policies but given the orthogonal nature of the two modes we currently support and that no real or anticipated use cases for additional modes are known, I'm not convinced it's a good fit. Are there any real or anticipated use cases I'm missing? I propose we replace the (str)sync_mode="" with (bool)mirror=False anywhere stored or passed. Are there any real or anticipated use cases I'm missing? Thoughts? </body> </html>