Let us know how it goes. Here I just don't have the need, and patching is so easy and permanent that this is not an issue, so don't really understand you finding it problematic.
be aware that keeping on top of sealant drying up over time, if bike not used for a while.
also the required sudden fast high pressure to seat a tire.
This is another reason for me to not be interested, for now, but will probably learn one day if a trip required it.
I've gone through the steps of learning disc brake stuff and lots of mistakes, so can learn this stuff too one day I guess.
as you say though, lighter and more flexible supple tires do become addictive.
re touring,I still think it is still specific to thorny areas.
May change my mind on this one day.
I’ve been riding tubeless for about 10 years now, starting with tubeless tubulars (Tufo etc..) and now for the last several years with tubeless clinchers.
What I have discovered is that there is no difference in flat performance between the tubulars and the tubeless clinchers. In both cases I get 1 flat in about 5000 or so miles compared to 10 or so in that same mileage. So I think that we’re going to find that tubeless is inherently more reliable than with a tube. I have to say, I really enjoy largely eliminating flats.
The advantage, at least for tubeless clinchers is that if you do get a flat, if you can’t repair it on the spot and on the rim with one of the pluggers, then worst case, you remove the valve from the rim and install a tube.
That then gives all the traditional contingencies such as patching the tube should it fail again or a tire boot for a slashed tire etc...
So based on that, I can find no reason to not switch to tubeless at least for the touring I do. In point of fact, going tubeless probably gives your more contingency/backup that going with a straight tubed setup would. And you also get all the riding benefits of lower rolling weight, better and more supple ride.