Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> writes: > Oh, that is an interesting perspective. Here is how I arrived at the opposite > conclusion initially: Searching for 'ignore_env' shows that we care about it > as well for the index and graft paths, which are not the object store, hence > it would be better kept in the repository. (The alternative would be to > duplicate it into the raw object store, but I do not like data duplication) > > But maybe it is better to duplicate this one bit instead of passing through > a larger scoped object.
If a larger scoped repository refers to a smaller scoped object-store, is there still a need to duplicate that bit, instead of referring to the bit the smaller scoped one has when asking about the bit in the larger scoped one? I am not sure if these "do not look at environment variables" is an attribute of these entities---it sounds more like an attribute for each invocation of an operation, i.e. "I want to learn where the index is but would ignore GIT_INDEX environment for this particular query." and "What's the value of this ref? Please honor the common-dir environment during this query". So from that point of view, it may not matter where the "bit" lives, among repository, object-store, or ref-store.
