Ah, no -- the cache ACL has to be explicitly applied, e.g., cache deny all
Cheers, On 17/06/2010, at 12:58 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > Well it sounds totally fine in principle; I'm wondering (without > reading the patch) how you define 'we are not caching' - just no > cachedirs ? That excludes mem-only caching (or perhaps thats not > supported now). > > -Rob -- Mark Nottingham m...@yahoo-inc.com
