Agree on avoiding additional setting. Re: cache Basically if the file is not found locally then it goes out to the URL to get it. So a local file couldn't be overwritten as that's the first thing it checks. Cache is currently an option to the view too. Which should be documented so it can be turned off if disk space is limited locally.
Re: 1.2 No problem. Should I not even open a ticket with the patch until after or is it OK to do now? On Apr 14, 3:14 am, Russell Keith-Magee <freakboy3...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Ed Menendez <edmenen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Is there any interest in turning this into a patch for a new feature? > > >http://menendez.com/blog/using-django-as-pass-through-image-proxy/ > > > It should only be used on dev servers but it really is a huge time > > saver for developers vs rsync and since it keeps images locally it's a > > better solution than prod images via S3. > > > It's 100% backward compatible and could be implemented with either a > > settings and/or a change in the view parameter. > > > (r'^(?P<path>.*)$', 'static_fallback.serve', {'document_root' : '/ > > path/to/my/files/', 'fallback_static_url': 'http://myprodsite.com'}) > > > or > > > FALLBACK_STATIC_URL = 'http://myprodsite.com' > > > If anyone think it's a good idea, let me know and I'll create a patch. > > Broadly speaking, yes, but: > > * I'm not a fan of the separate FALLBACK_STATIC_URL setting. This > isn't something that needs to be extraordinarily flexible - you're > going to drop a static view in a DEBUG block in your urls.py for > testing purposes, and you should be able to specify your fallback > there. > > * The caching behavior makes me a little nervous. I don't have any > problems with the idea of falling back to a main image server, and the > idea that those requests can be optimized sounds good; However, I'm > concerned that users could get caught in a web of partially updated > caches, or get into conflicts where a local file that a user is > working with is overwritten by an enthusiastic downstream cache > retrieval. > > * That said, we're in the closing phases of getting Django 1.2 out > the door, so now isn't the best time to propose or discuss new > features. Once 1.2 is out, we'll open the floor for discussion of new > proposals. > > Yours, > Russ Magee %-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
