> On 7 Jul 2021, at 15:25, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> I doubt it's worth complicating the code for this fringe case though.
This thread has stalled, and with the updated docs/help output done for this
option I don't think this is worth pursuing (especially given the lack of
complaints over behav
> On 7 Jul 2021, at 04:23, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> I'm not able to come up with an exact situation to prove this, but
> this behaviour seems potentially dangerous. The user might mix the
> --sync-only option with other options, but would be extremely
> surprised if those other options didn't take
