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. ;)
