apr-dev folk,
the major reason for most flame wars etc is the inability to read email
statements for what they are; reading sarcasm where none is intended
or reading verbatim where humor/sarcasm is intended. And most importantly,
on a technical list, reading something into a post some context that isn't
there based on the reader's perspective.
My last post reverting the veto of memcache (and asserting a hypothetical
veto by second-guessing where this discussion moves next) started with a
statement that testing is only *one* aspect. The crux of the objection is
that what memcache does is dirt simple stupid, and forcing users to seek out
a package to do that dirt simple stupid function/feature indicates laziness
and sloth on the part of the implementors (us). My message went on to express
how the alternate rich implementations of memcached allow users to scale these
functions in all sorts of good directions, but that at the most basic app,
there's no reason for us not to 'just do it' ourselves.
Throughout this thread, testing was one attribute. It's the only attribute
which people have addressed in their replies. I'd like to see someone talk
to the actual aspect of 'why the heck dispatch every caching application
to external prerequisites?' and get over the testing aspect, which some people
will clearly be interested in, and some clearly detest (all pun intended :-)
Bill
