In a recent note, Klaus Weide said:
> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2000 08:43:34 -0600 (CST)
>
> On Sun, 2 Jan 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > certainly made sense in the Bad Old Days when pages were cached in
> > rendered form. It seems to make less sense now that they're cached in
> > source form.
>
> Bad Old Days??
> Pages aren now cached in source form instead of in rendered form????
>
> Sorry, but *that* is silliness.
> Maybe you turn on SOURCE_CACHE for yourself. Apparently you don't mind
> the bugs. That doesn't mean that that kind of caching has
> completely superseded the "rendered form" caching.
>
Oops. Tripped up in an inconsistency. I usually argue the minimalist
POV; I believe when source caching was debated, I took the side of
leaving caching to a proxy. But, yes, when it became available I
turned it on -- for better or for worse, the development effort had
already been spent. You're provoking me to reconsider.
But, as long as you acknowledge bugs in the facility, I deem it one
of the bugs that d(ownload) bypasses the source cache.
-- gil
--
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL
