>How about we get rid of lazy-load-templates and replace it with 
>disable-template-cache or disable-cache?

If the behavior is going to be to load the file on each request (which I
think is a handy behavior to have), I think disable-template-cache is a
more descriptive name.

I'm debating with myself here whether it would be useful to have both
features (clearly disable-template-cache would make lazy-load-templates
pointless, but is there a situation where you would want
lazy-load-templates but not disable-template-cache)? I'm thinking of a
production server where you want to minimize downtime at server restart,
so you use lazy-load-templates so the site will come back up as quickly
as possible, only running into the loading overhead when you finally
need it.

>Also, I was thinking that it would be nice to have an alternative way 
>of setting these parameters besides modifying the config file.  It 
>would be trivial >to have most of these tags overridden by a system 
>property, so you could start the JVM with 
>-Ddisable-template-cache=true.  To minimize collisions, we could have 
>the option of using the parent element as a prefix:  
>-Dtransform-factory.disable-template-caching=true.

>It's crude, but it seems like it would be really useful.  No changing 
>version controlled files when you are working in "development mode".

I think this is a good idea, and I like the full parent element prefix
idea. As annoying as it is, maybe you want to even take it one step
further to -Dmaverick.transform-factory.disable-template-caching=true.
I'm just trying to prevent some situation where another library someone
happens to be using also has a
transform-factory.disable-template-caching property (unlikely with this
case, but you see where I am going).

--jim


_______________________________________________
Mav-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mav-user

Reply via email to