Christian Boos wrote:
> 
>>What could also be done is to move all the plugins not modified since 3 
>>or 4 years into an /inactive folder with the same internal structure. It 
>>should be possible to revive a plugin in a similar way than it is today 
>>to "adopt-a-hack", moving it away of /inactive. Conversely, once a year 
>>move there the plugins who just entered their 3rd or 4th year of bit
rot...
>>
>>That would also clarify things and avoid having too big folders even in 
>>the new scheme (the plugin/ folder in particular).
> 

Christian beat me to it on the inactive plugins idea, I think it's a great
addition it will also make adopting a hack easier and quicker if a plugin is
inactive and someone requests adoption you can do it immediately.



Christian Boos wrote:
> 
>>If caching and invalidation logic proves to be difficult, take the 
>>plunge and migrate to 0.12dev where you could use the cached attributes 
>>(see TracDev/CacheManager) ;-)
> 
> -- Christian
> 

I don't know if you can control your server setup or not but if you can the
following might help speed things up.
1) Set the Cache-Control header for static files to something high since
these won't change frequently
2) Set up a reverse proxy, my preferred method is to use an nginx front end
that handles all static files and proxies anything dynamic back to apache
running mod_wsgi.
I find that setup very fast and kind on server resources, if you like the
idea and want a hand setting it up let me know.

~Rowan
_______________________________________________
th-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.trac-hacks.org/mailman/listinfo/th-users



-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n3.nabble.com/trac-hacks-org-on-Trac-0-11-release-candidate-1-tp74447p97762.html
Sent from the th-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
th-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.trac-hacks.org/mailman/listinfo/th-users

Reply via email to