[wp-hackers] Caching as part of the core

[Almog Baku]

So.. What define if something get into the core or not?

If all the reasons I list before(mainly: let the developers more involved
with the proccess) dosen't count?!?

בתאריך יום רביעי, 25 ביולי 2012, Jesse Friedman כתב:

> Shouldn't the WordPress 80/20 Rule apply here? Not everything is built into
> core for a reason. There are thousands of features that *some* users need
> and oddly enough there are thousands of plugins available to support those
> needs.
>
> Jesse
>
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Bryan Petty <bpetty at bluehost.com<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> > > Ok... so now you'll admit that the Transients API has high overhead, is
> > > difficult to use, and is in-appropriate for page or fragment caching.
> > > You also admit that the dropins are "hacky as heck".
> > >
> > > However, you'll still tell me that's what I should use when I so much
> as
> > > suggest that WP_Object_Cache could be expanded (in a 100% backwards
> > > compatible way) to support persistent cache backends in core like it
> > > used to, but done the right way this time.
> >
> > No, I tell you that it's appropriate to implement persistent cache
> > backends *for your specific needs*. It shouldn't be in core. It should
> > be done on a per-host, per-server, per-setup basis.
> >
> > There's no universal answers here. Core can't implement persistent
> > caching in a universal way that doesn't have downsides.
> >
> >
> > > How about this...
> > >
> > > What if the Transients API was converted over to a WP_Object_Cache
> > > backend, and used as the default fallback instead of the file backend
> if
> > > none of the accelerators are available (APC/XCache/WinCache)?
> >
> > Implementing the object, or the transients, cache as a file backend is
> > a *proven* loser. It sucks. Royally. On the majority of hosts. Search
> > for the arguments over 5 years ago to find proof.
> >
> > If you want to write it for your particular set of hosting
> > capabilities, then by all means do so. As a plugin. Convince more
> > people that your solution fits the 80/20 rule. Then, you have a shot
> > at core. Fit the majority case.
> >
> > I'm not saying I'm right, or that I have any form of control over it,
> > because I don't. I'm just saying that you need to *prove* that you are
> > right. See, I don't control what goes into core, not by a long shot.
> > I'm just one of the few who knows how it works and who is more than
> > happy to tell you what you need to do. PROVE IT. Then you have a shot.
> > Right now, a whole lot of people whom I've talked to about it on
> > multiple occasions thinks that the evidence is against you. Prove me
> > wrong. Show me that you're right. Stats. Numbers. Code. This sort of
> > yap-yap goes nowhere, it's just me arguing with you. But if you show
> > improvement, if you can show, empirically, that you have the right
> > answer, then everybody will back you.
> >
> > This is open source. You don't get anywhere without code that actually
> > gets the job done, man.
> >
> > -Otto
> > _______________________________________________
> > wp-hackers mailing list
> > wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com <javascript:;>
> > http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> >
>
>
>
> --
> thanks,
>
> *Jesse Friedman*
> 508-507-9673 | jesserfriedman at gmail.com <javascript:;>
> http://jesserfriedman.com | @professor <http://twitter.com/professor>
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com <javascript:;>
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>