Hi Jeff, thanks for the fast reply. On 2020-10-30 01:55:41, Jeff King wrote: > I agree that "get" should not be taking a lock. And looking at the code, > I don't think that it is. > > However, after successfully using a password, Git will then trigger each > helper with a "store" command. So likely what you are seeing is each > fetch telling credential-store to store the successful password. Ah, the plot thickens. That sounds more like it. On 2020-10-30 01:55:41, Jeff King wrote: > There are a few options here: > > - we could have Git not do that. And indeed, I wrote a patch for that > long ago: > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/20120407033417.GA13914@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > but it turns out that some people rely on it. There were some > options discussed there for moving it forward, but nothing ever > happened. > > Another option that we didn't discuss there: we could remember which > helper gave us the credential and not feed it back to itself. That > would let simple cases work without the extra request, but would let > more complex ones (feeding the result of one helper to another) > continue to work the same. Right, I did not imagine you could chain credential helpers, but that makes sense. On 2020-10-30 01:55:41, Jeff King wrote: > Interested in trying a patch for any of those? Sounds good to me, I should be able to handle it if you CC/BCC me (subscribing to the firehose is a bit too much). For reference, I'm using: > $ git --version > git version 2.29.1
