On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 07:22:28AM -0400, Jeff Hostetler wrote:
> > > I don't think we should pass this environment variable to remote
> > > repositories. It should be listed in local_repo_env[] in environment.c.
> >
> > I'm not sure I agree. This is really about the context in which the
> > command is executing, not anything about the particular repository
> > you're operating on.
> >
> > For fetch/push operations that touch a remote, I doubt it would matter
> > either way (and anyway, those often cross network boundaries that don't
> > propagate environment variables anyway).
> >
> > But imagine that "git status" learns to recurse into submodules and run
> > "git status" inside them. Surely we would want the submodule repos to
> > also avoid taking any unnecessary locks?
> >
> > -Peff
> >
>
> https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/commit/ff63b51c22389139a864eb2e565c6cdc5a30f061
>
> https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/pull/1004/commits/45bad66192352481acbc826f11d90c8928b39a7a
>
> We should compare this with what we did in Git for Windows last fall.
> I guess those commits didn't get pushed upstream.
Right. I think you missed the initial message in the thread that
explains how this is an expanded version of ff63b51c22. :)
I didn't know about the environment thing in 45bad66192, though[1]. That
makes me even more confident that this is the right approach.
-Peff
[1] Sorry for not doing my homework more carefully on the existing
solution. GitHub Desktop ran into the same situation and pointed me
at ff63b51c22. I extrapolated the rest of it on my own. ;)
