Re: Funky caching

Bob Ippolito wrote:

>
> 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
>
>
So we're back to the days of uploading a bunch of files to our webserver 
everytime we want new content?

Jesse

>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 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/
> _______________________________________________
> Pyblosxom-devel mailing list
> Pyblosxom-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pyblosxom-devel
>



-------------------------------------------------------
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/