Re: Optional argument for `file-local-copy'

[Stefan Monnier]

>> So maybe the better option is to do the caching on the handler-side.
>> But there's no need for any changes to file-local-copy for that.
> Do you mean we don't need the REUSE-IF-ALREADY-EXISTS argument, and
> file-local-copy shall always cache?

Right: the handler downloads into the cache, and then serves a copy from
the cache (so file-local-copy would always return a new file, but the
copy is local).


        Stefan