Re: CachingSource

2006-04-05 Thread Reinhard Poetz
Jeremy Quinn wrote: On 3 Apr 2006, at 23:09, Joerg Heinicke wrote: On 01.04.2006 13:09, Jeremy Quinn wrote: But the good part is that the code is in the release - it doesn't really matter where it is as long as it is available :) I am not entirely sure that the code is in the Branch_2_1_

Re: CachingSource

2006-04-05 Thread Jeremy Quinn
On 3 Apr 2006, at 23:09, Joerg Heinicke wrote: On 01.04.2006 13:09, Jeremy Quinn wrote: But the good part is that the code is in the release - it doesn't really matter where it is as long as it is available :) I am not entirely sure that the code is in the Branch_2_1_X any more. AFAIR th

Re: CachingSource

2006-04-03 Thread Joerg Heinicke
On 01.04.2006 13:09, Jeremy Quinn wrote: But the good part is that the code is in the release - it doesn't really matter where it is as long as it is available :) I am not entirely sure that the code is in the Branch_2_1_X any more. AFAIR there is no longer a scratchpad block in the branch.

Re: CachingSource

2006-04-01 Thread Jeremy Quinn
Hi Carsten On 1 Apr 2006, at 08:24, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: Jeremy Quinn wrote: On 31 Mar 2006, at 13:08, Max Pfingsthorn wrote: Core would be best as it is very general and all the cache related things are there as well. I can do it today, but what about the codefreeze? Whoops, bad timing

Re: CachingSource

2006-03-31 Thread Carsten Ziegeler
Jeremy Quinn wrote: > On 31 Mar 2006, at 13:08, Max Pfingsthorn wrote: > >> Core would be best as it is very general and all the cache related >> things are there as well. >> I can do it today, but what about the codefreeze? > > Whoops, bad timing Carsten, WDYT ? > Good question :) I thin

Re: CachingSource

2006-03-31 Thread Jean-Baptiste Quenot
* Max Pfingsthorn: > Btw, Jeremy, I don't think the caching source factory is > dependent on the eventcache block. AFAIR, it talks to the Cache > interface. Yes, I think so, see http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=114361997731742&w=2 -- Jean-Baptiste Quenot http://caraldi.c

Re: CachingSource

2006-03-31 Thread Jeremy Quinn
ry is dependent on the eventcache block. AFAIR, it talks to the Cache interface. Thanks for your feedback Max. regards Jeremy -Original Message- From: Reinhard Poetz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 13:24 To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Subject: Re: CachingSource J

RE: CachingSource

2006-03-31 Thread Max Pfingsthorn
max > -Original Message- > From: Reinhard Poetz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 13:24 > To: dev@cocoon.apache.org > Subject: Re: CachingSource > > > Jeremy Quinn wrote: > > Hi All > > > > I was wondering what happened to

Re: CachingSource

2006-03-31 Thread Jeremy Quinn
Hi Reinhard I think the code is dependent on eventcache, so that could be the block to put it in, but TBH I do not know where the source has gone to. regards Jeremy On 31 Mar 2006, at 12:23, Reinhard Poetz wrote: Jeremy Quinn wrote: Hi All I was wondering what happened to the Cachin

Re: CachingSource

2006-03-31 Thread Reinhard Poetz
Jeremy Quinn wrote: Hi All I was wondering what happened to the CachingSource? I used to be in the scratchpad. Has another technique replaced this? I am using 2.1.9-dev. I would like to force cache (time-based) some calls to a Webservice API, that are otherwise uncachable. I was hopin

Re: CachingSource/CachingSourceFactory

2006-03-29 Thread Jean-Baptiste Quenot
* Jens Maukisch: > the line 294 of the CachingSourceFactory looks like this at the > moment: queryString = remainingParameters.getQueryString(); > > Is there a special reason why it is not getEncodedQueryString() > as the parameters aren't encoded anymore at this point? No reason, it's a bug.