Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Preliminary Arch Cache available

[Tom Lord]

I think it's likely to be at least the starting point of a profoundly
important and highly pervasive hack, is all.   So, "proceed with
caution" or something.

-t



    > X-42-Pre-Check: Attempted
    > Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 00:53:41 -0400
    > From: Aaron Bentley <address@hidden>
    > User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040306)
    > X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
    > CC: address@hidden, address@hidden
    > X-Enigmail-Version: 0.83.2.0
    > X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime
    > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
    > X-Panometrics-MailScanner: Found to be clean
    > X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-42mail (2004-01-11) on 
    >   mail.42inc.com
    > X-Spam-DCC: SPAMCHECK.NET: mail 1168; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
    > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.3 required=4.5 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 
autolearn=ham 
    >   version=2.64-42mail
    > X-42email-MailScanner-Information: Please contact 
http://www.42inc.com/support.html for more information.
    > X-42email-MailScanner: Found to be clean
    > X-UIDL: 768783e23c5597d00a69637089c0edbd
    > 
    > 
    > Tom Lord wrote:
    > >     > From: address@hidden (James Blackwell)
    > > 
    > >     > DUDE! This sounds neat! Anything holding it up for 1.2.3?
    > > 
    > > Changes of this sort have a huge, multi-faceted, potentially
    > > long-term, potentially project-foobaring impact and are not to be
    > > entered into lightly.
    > 
    > There are two sides.  The code is unintrusive, so even if it was a load 
    > of crap, it wouldn't affect anyone unless they configured Arch to use 
    > caching.
    > 
    > But if the caching idea itself is bogus in some way (I don't think so, 
    > but I'm interested in discussing it), then it would be unfortunate to 
    > merge it prematurely.
    > 
    > Aaron
    > 
    >