On 2013-06-16 23:21:19 +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: > I can confirm that there's no form of caching (at least, nothing > explicitly implemented in the program; I am not 100 % sure about the > ruby SOAP client library, but I think it does not cache queries > transparently...): apt-listbugs needs the most up-to-date information > known to the BTS, therefore it queries the BTS SOAP interface each time.
This is a silly argument! After a few *seconds* (which happens all the time if the recommended way to do a OR is to call apt-listbugs several times), one can assume that cache information is up-to-date. There's nothing wrong in having a cache if the expire time is low (e.g. 5 minutes). -- Vincent Lefèvre <[email protected]> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
