+1

I like the idea of quiet transfert
but does it deserve an additional option: shouldn't this quiet transfert be activated in existing batch mode = non-interactive = no input, but limited output too

WDYT?

Why do we need this? There is a batch mode, minimal transfer output.

@michael-o I think even quiet should/could prevent logging the transfer output.
I just created a PR with the provided patch as requested by Jason van Zyl in the ticket to help with its processing.
Feel free to improve it as you believe it would be the best!

@martin-g, quiet implementation logs nothing. It is a no-op. So it does what you want. What improvement are you trying to make here?
@jvanzyl, can you share some thoughts?

@martin-g does the quiet option provide the behaviour you'd like?

@jvanzyl Yes. I don't need the new option.

quiet option is too quiet, I originally wanted just to hide the transfer logs, sometime it can be annoying in CI systems

@JigarJoshi , you can use batch mode for that.

Resolve #5552