Re: lynx-dev SOURCE_CACHE "problem" - proposal of SOURCE_CACHE_FOR_INCOMPLETE

[Klaus Weide]

On Sat, 8 Apr 2000, Vlad Harchev wrote:
> 
>   I don't understand how new setting would be done as suboption, if we want to
> preserve backward compatibility. Please give me hints.
>   We can't just allow things like
> SOURCE_CACHE:MEMORY
> SOURCE_CACHE:FOR_INTERUPTED:TRUE
>   - syntax doesn't allow this or will require a very intensive code changes

SOURCE_CACHE:MEMORY,KEEP_INCOMPLETE
SOURCE_CACHE:FILE,DROP_INCOMPLETE

> and will just confuse users more than one additional option
> SOURCE_CACHE_FOR_INCOMPLETE.
>   Also, I wonder - what's the difference for the user between suboption and
> new option? We have to document both. 

Less top-level options.

   Klaus