Re: [Banshee-List] Fwd: Lastfm 2.0 access

["Patryk Zawadzki" <patrys pld-linux org>]

On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 5:59 PM, LCID Fire <lcid-fire gmx net> wrote:
> Patryk Zawadzki wrote:
>> Why do you need an in-process proxy? Can't you just provide the cache
>> on your own (using sqlite for example) instead of blindly hammering
>> the API and using another library for sanitization?
> I could - but to me there is no point in doing things more than once
> (e.g. in further projects). So if I need some caching I don't think
> about doing this fast - I'm thinking about doing this the right way -
> which to me is having a black box that is doing all the caching and is
> reusable.
> So I don't "need" an in-process proxy - it's just the most elegant
> design I can think of.

Than you'd need to teach the proxy which URIs are supposed to be
cacheable and which are dynamic views that change over time despite
keeping the same address. This way you'll end up with a specific
solution anyway.

-- 
Patryk Zawadzki
PLD Linux Distribution