Re: sprint-related django.core.cache thoughts/questions

2007-12-05 Thread pbx
Just wanted to note for posterity that the first and fourth items in the list that started this thread have been taken care of. Thanks again to David and Brian for diving in. > * The "simple" backend seems obsolete. The newer "locmem" is > functionally equivalent for the user, but is suitable for

Re: sprint-related django.core.cache thoughts/questions

2007-12-01 Thread pbx
> I'd like to see a patch that > aliased "simple" to "locmem" and raised a DeprecationWarning. We'll > then remove simple in 1.0. Done: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/6086 > > * Should the "file" backend's _file_for_key method be rewritten to use > > hashes instead of cleaned-up strings? I

Re: sprint-related django.core.cache thoughts/questions

2007-12-01 Thread Jacob Kaplan-Moss
On Dec 1, 9:44 am, pbx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * The "simple" backend seems obsolete. The newer "locmem" is > functionally equivalent for the user, but is suitable for deployment > as well as development. Should "simple" be removed? This might allow > refactoring of the backend code to simpli

sprint-related django.core.cache thoughts/questions

2007-12-01 Thread pbx
A while ago I was picking through the cache system and found a few things that seemed like they could use cleanup. I'm interested in hearing thoughts on which of these might be worth pursuing, whether today or later. * The "simple" backend seems obsolete. The newer "locmem" is functionally equiva