Re: Pass Thru Image Proxy Patch Interest?

> Yes, I was thinking the other day that it would be a cool solution for > serve() to be able to use storage backends Wouldn't it be better to have some {% serve path/to/file %} template tags, that does all the work of checking where the file exists and returning the right URL? Putting this into

Re: Pass Thru Image Proxy Patch Interest?

This blog post http://bit.ly/a4iyJ6 also talks about the ability to use what is called a remote URL to eventually server content (read content delivery network). In my opinion it also has a pretty good solution about caching images when setting up a pass though image proxy solution. -- You

Re: Pass Thru Image Proxy Patch Interest?

Yes, I was thinking the other day that it would be a cool solution for serve() to be able to use storage backends On Apr 16, 7:09 am, Kevin Howerton wrote: > Why not just use the backend feature that already exists? > > I have an S3 backend that does this... > > It

Re: Pass Thru Image Proxy Patch Interest?

Why not just use the backend feature that already exists? I have an S3 backend that does this... It checks if it's on S3, if not it serves it locally. If it's on S3 it throws the url into memcache, and bob is your uncle. On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Russell Keith-Magee

Re: Pass Thru Image Proxy Patch Interest?

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Ed Menendez wrote: > 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.

Re: Pass Thru Image Proxy Patch Interest?

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

Re: Pass Thru Image Proxy Patch Interest?

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Ed Menendez 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

Pass Thru Image Proxy Patch Interest?

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