What do you think? :) I haven't investigated what would need to happen, but I thought I'd ping you about this first.

I'm not sure if there's enough interest for this, but I know it'd be very useful in several use cases.

Sister issue in the CDN issue queue: #875632: Storage API + CDN.

Comments

jbrown’s picture

jbrown CreditAttribution: jbrown commented

Sure - want to have a BoF in Denver?

Wim Leers’s picture

Wim Leers
Location Ghent 🇧🇪🇪🇺
CreditAttribution: Wim Leers commented

I'm not sure yet I'll be there. If I'll be there: definitely.

jpstrikesback’s picture

jpstrikesback CreditAttribution: jpstrikesback commented

Really interested in this...

rogical’s picture

rogical CreditAttribution: rogical commented

Storage api provides redundancy, CDN utilizes the redundancy!

The file conveyor mode would be a good way to integrate:

In File Conveyor mode, this module integrates with the File Conveyor daemon. This allows for much more advanced setups: files can be processed (e.g. optimize images like smush.it, minify CSS with YUI Compressor, minify JS with YUI compressor or Google Closure Compiler, and it's easy to add your own!), before they are synced and your CDN doesn't have to support Origin Pull, any push method is fine (supported transfer protocols: FTP, Amazon S3, Rackspace CloudFiles). File Conveyor is flexible enough to be used with any CDN, thus it enables you to avoid vendor lock-in.

Perignon’s picture

Perignon CreditAttribution: Perignon commented
Issue summary: View changes
Status: Active » Fixed

If still an issue please reopen this ticket and we will take a look at it!

Status: Fixed » Closed (fixed)

Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.