[Cosmo-dev] Caching Issues Followup

[Ted Leung]

On Jul 25, 2007, at 4:35 PM, Bobby Rullo wrote:

> I sympathize with you here. At this point it's a matter of  
> developer resources.
>
> I'm working on the last couple of bugs I have and then performance  
> stuff (outside perf gains that can be obtained through caching that  
> is :-) )
>
> Matthew has more than his share.
>
> That leaves Travis, who has done a bunch of work in this area  
> already, and who has very little on his plate now.
>
> So with that in mind it seems like Travis could either take some  
> mde bugs or work on this caching stuff.
>
> Matthew, how badly do you need to get some of these bugs off your  
> plate?

I swapped IM's w/ MDE here at OSCON - he has 3 bugs that Travis could  
take:

https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10073
https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10113
https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8500

Can we reliably reproduce the caching bugs?  I thought that this was  
somewhat intermittent

Ted

>
> bobby
>
> ps - travis has seen weird date headers come back from Cosmo he  
> thinks. Can't give more details than this, but it's something for  
> you guys to follow up on with each other.
>
> On Jul 25, 2007, at 2:34 PM, Brian Moseley wrote:
>
>> On 7/25/07, Bobby Rullo <br at osafoundation.org> wrote:
>>> I agree it's not ideal, but it seems like right now it's a choice
>>> between "slower and correct" and "faster and wrong".
>>
>> only if the option of fixing the broken caching behavior is taken off
>> the table, which i think is premature.
>>
>>> There are other bugs which are blockers  on everyone's plate and  
>>> this
>>> one has proven to be quite a time-suck for Travis (and myself to a
>>> lesser extent)
>>
>> i understand that this bug is hard to chase down, and for that reason
>> other blockers should have priority over it, but once they're  
>> done, we
>> should try again.
>>
>>> If we had a developer focus on pretty much just this for a while I'm
>>> sure we could solve it, but the issue is...what is "a while"? Do we
>>> let this hold up preview?
>>
>> +0. i don't believe we should release without fixing the bug, but  
>> as i
>> probably can't effectively contribute to finding the problem, i can't
>> take a firmer stance.
>> _______________________________________________
>> cosmo-dev mailing list
>> cosmo-dev at lists.osafoundation.org
>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmo-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> cosmo-dev mailing list
> cosmo-dev at lists.osafoundation.org
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmo-dev