cache-control is certainly advantageous over older methods, as it
certainly does provide finer grain control.
Darren L. VanBuren
=====================
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 19:54, Brennan Ashton <bashton(a)brennanashton.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Darren VanBuren
<onekopaka(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> However, browsers cache on EXACT URLs. So if you attach ?2010011023 to
> a URL, it will only be valid until the URL changes or the expiry time
> comes around.
>
> Darren L. VanBuren
> =====================
>
http://theoks.net/
>
However if my browser caches
http://fedoraproject.org and there is a
static file pointed at called image1.gif, even if you update
fedoraproject.org to point to the static file image1-2.gif instead,
that update will not be seen until
fedoraproject.org expires from my
cache and I will still be seeing image1.gif.
I really think that cache-control is the way to go at least for
content that we want to cache, but also want to have control of all
the time.
--Brennan Ashton
_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list