On Thu, 4 Jul 2002, Cees Hek wrote:

> I'm open to anything that will solve my problem.  Exposing the cache_key
> generation would be a step in the right direction for my needs.  I have
> stripped down my initial patch to only consolodate the cache function
> into using a common function to get the cache_key (_get_cache_key()).
> This function checks to see if the user passed a 'cache_key' as an
> option and if not, just returns the 'filepath'.
>
> Is this more or less what you had in mind?

Basically, yes.  Although I want to think about it a little more, 2.6
should include something like this.

Good work!

-sam


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to