[wp-hackers] should (can?) wp-cache be adopted into the core?
David Chait
davebytes at comcast.net
Tue Apr 17 02:57:23 GMT 2007
there's been on-and-off issues with it, and while I applaud Ricardo on
his time and effort taking Staticize Reloaded and bringing it forward
into the new generation of WP, he's admitted to be overloaded and unable
to keep it up to date and I think was asking for someone to take it
over. I'd claim that wp-cache is one of the most critical plugins out
there for anyone with even a moderate level of traffic, and that having
it not being properly attended to, updated, heck even improved, is going
to become a 'critical issue' to many folks out there. And I think it
needs to be closer to the action.
Opinions? Matt? (since I think staticize was your baby originally, no?)
Any reasons it shouldn't be in the core (even if it's kept as a
plugin...), while the object-caching approach IS? Note that object
caching has, in the past, shown to be detrimental to performance on the
average shared hosting setup -- though on dedi setups, with APC or
memcached and/or php bytecode caching, I could imagine setups where the
object cache could beat out the wp-cache 'php page' caching system. I
run on shared for cost+stability management, I'd run on a VPS if my site
really took off again.. ;)
Just with all the discussion of things like tagging systems, adding new
features, it seems that the management of staticize/wp-cache is really
important to the community as an 'old feature' (in a sense), that aside
from antispam stuff is one of the first recommended things to install
for a successful site.
Musing,
-d
More information about the wp-hackers
mailing list