Exports added by :with are ineffective when :user is specified

Start by locating the with and user builder methods shown in the issue and inspect how they compose the generated shell command when both options are used. The change is done when the with builder does not add an export subshell for a user command, while the user builder still supplies the environment variables.

When a command is mapped, (:should_map?), both :with and :user are invoked.

In both builder methods, the environment variables specified are intended to be inherited by the subshell.

Say that we have the env var MYVAR=myvar, and the command mycommand, which needs to be run as the user myuser. The relevant builder methods are:

    def with(&_block)
      env_string = environment_string
      return yield if env_string.empty?
      "( export #{env_string} ; #{yield} )"
    end

    def user(&_block)
      return yield unless options[:user]
      env_string = environment_string
      "sudo -u #{options[:user].to_s.shellescape} #{env_string + " " unless env_string.empty?}-- sh -c #{yield.shellescape}"
    end

this will generate something like:

( export MYVAR=myvar ; sudo -u myuser MYVAR=myvar -- sh -c command )

The problem is that the export is ineffective, because exports are not inherited by the sudo subshell.

While this is harmless, it clutters the generated commands, and it's also semantically incorrect (because it's ineffective) and confusing.

This could be avoided by just yielding the the builder block if options[:user] is set:

    def with(&_block)
>      # Exports are ineffective on non-login (sudo) shells; in this case, the :user builder takes
>      # care of setting them.
>      return yield if options[:user]
      env_string = environment_string
      return yield if env_string.empty?
      "( export #{env_string} ; #{yield} )"
    end

This makes the (internal) commands output more readable (and understandable). While this has no effect on the end users, it helps understanding those who approach Capistrano/Sshkit development (at least, it did it for me 😬).

If this is approved (either in this form or another), I can easily open a PR.