Re: Funky caching
Bob Ippolito <bob-Zl9L/[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.pyblosxom.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Dec 8, 2004, at 11:23 AM, Jesse Lawrence wrote: > I am working on Roberto De Almeida's funky caching implementation in > an attempt to fully integrate it with pyblosxom, handling newly posted > comments and all. It is my opinion (for what it's worth) that this > should be the one and only static rendering mechanism for pyblosxom, > because it's automatic (behind the scenes) and fairly elegant. There are other reasons for static rendering other than performance, namely security and access privileges. If you use static rendering, not funky caching, you don't have to worry about security because there is no server-side code in your blog (ignoring comments for now, you could "outsource" that as pycs does). Also, you don't need permission to run server-side code to deploy a purely statically rendered blog. -bob ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/