Sledge FTB Posted June 20, 2017 Posted June 20, 2017 Or you may call it a blacklist, depending on your perspective. Thing is (even though I hate it), lots of our member have a ticker-image running in their footer. But these are not updated anymore due to the image-cache (which works brilliant besides this issue). what would help is a option for a small list of "whitelisted domains". Images from those domains will not be cached. Problem solved, everybody happy Sounds like a plan?
Numbered Posted June 21, 2017 Posted June 21, 2017 Agree with that. Our users like to use tickers. Here is example image, which must exclude from imageproxy (or set different caching time, than others)
Sledge FTB Posted June 27, 2017 Author Posted June 27, 2017 Next question is, how do we get some attention from a developer? Or are their other possibilities? It is quite easy to let a cronjob do the dirty work and delete any cached image from domain whatever.com. But I have a feeling that that will at least break the images in their relative post, but it even might screw up the complete cache server. Another idea ... instead of a white/black-list, an attribute as image option as a kind of (cache) opt-out, would do as well.
Sledge FTB Posted July 1, 2017 Author Posted July 1, 2017 No one else? I don't want to be an annoying bumper, but I had expected more replies, ideas, thoughts on this subject. Bummer.
Sledge FTB Posted December 21, 2018 Author Posted December 21, 2018 A year has passed and it still seems weird that we're quite alone on this one. A small exclusion list, on which you can add domains to not be cached by the imageproxy would be great. Not only to use tickers, but plenty other sites share information through images and update those images over time.
opentype Posted December 21, 2018 Posted December 21, 2018 On 6/27/2017 at 3:04 AM, Sledge FTB said: Next question is, how do we get some attention from a developer? You got it by posting in the feedback topic. If there is no traction to your request it might never be implemented though. Personally, I neither have “ticker images” images on my sites nor do I use any site that has those. And the proxy cache feature (which I assume you are referring to) already has an option to set a cache time. So it’s not like you forced to caching or no caching. You can already force update intervals – just not on a domain level.
Sledge FTB Posted December 21, 2018 Author Posted December 21, 2018 Thank you for your replay @opentype, I figured "Feedback and Ideas" would be the best board for feature requests. Apparently not... Furthermore you're right. We could apply a cache time, but one of our main purposes of the cache is images not disappearing from our boards, after the source has been removed. So considering pros and cons it is not really what we're looking for.
opentype Posted December 21, 2018 Posted December 21, 2018 39 minutes ago, Sledge FTB said: I figured "Feedback and Ideas" would be the best board for feature requests. Apparently not... It is. IPS will read it (but usually not reply). Other clients will chime in if they want to support the request. If they don’t, then the request isn’t that popular apparently.
bfarber Posted December 21, 2018 Posted December 21, 2018 FWIW, while this request specifically hasn't been implemented, a new option in 4.4 has been added to only use the image proxy caching if the requested domain is not already secure. This may help solve the issue in a different manner. The image proxy was originally implemented to allow you to serve images from non-secure sources, securely (so you don't get the broken padlock in your browser). That said, it has always been a 100% on or off setting, but beginning with 4.4 you can now either serve all images, no images, or only insecure images through the proxy. If you switch to insecure images only, and your tickers are served from secure domains, they will no longer be routed through the image proxy.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.