Ha! I'm cool with 'provenance' if no
one objects.
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Andrew Otto <aotto(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
Oof, only that it is ugly! :)
Can you just call it ‘provenance', or are you trying to be more future
proof?
On Mar 4, 2015, at 12:11, Adam Baso <abaso(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
I pinged on Phabricator at
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90606
about modeling after that patch. That sort of approach should avoid cache
fragmentation.
As for parameter name, 'wmfxan' is short and I think would avoid
collisions. Any problems with this parameter name?
-Adam
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 8:27 AM, Nuria Ruiz <nuria(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
Ping ... (regarding cache question)
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Gergo Tisza <gtisza(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Nuria Ruiz <nuria(a)wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
>
>> 2. What about caching?
>> Is this page:*
>>
http://wikipedia.org/BarackObama?some_param=some-value
>> <http://wikipedia.org/BarackObama?some_param=some-value>* being
>> served from the cache as it should be?
>>
>
> The file download parameter was handled via this patch:
>
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/120617/
> Seems like an analogous scenario.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Analytics mailing list
> Analytics(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
>
>
_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
Analytics(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
Analytics(a)lists.wikimedia.org