Re: [PATCH] osxkeychain: lock for exclusive execution

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
> >   - we could remember _which_ helper we got the credential from, and
> >     avoid invoking it again.
> >
> >   - we could record a bit saying that the credential came from a helper,
> >     and then feed that back to helpers when storing. So osxkeychain
> >     could then decide not to store it.
> >
> > Both of those solve the repeated stores, but still let credentials
> > populate across helpers (which I still think is a questionable thing to
> > do by default, per the discussion in that thread, but is the very thing
> > that some people rely on).
> 
> Would "refreshing the last-time-used record" a valid use case for
> the behaviour that feeds the successful one back to where the
> credential came from?  Such a helper could instead log the last-time
> the credential was asked for, and assume that the lack of an explicit
> "reject" call signals that the use of the value it returned earlier
> was auccessfully used, but it is a less obvious way to implement
> such a "this hasn't been successfully used for a long time, perhaps
> we should expire/ask again/do something else?" logic.