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.