[koolba]

> I'm not a 100% sure but when I've used similar tools like this before the cached data coming from the web is the _content_ of the page, where the checked out repo I'm in is dealing with the _layout_ of the page.

Is this rendering the page remotely and fetching it? If so, it seems like the only point would be to reduce the server load on their end.

> Do you really need the contents of the newest blog posts to be pulled in each time you want to test a CSS layout change?

You would need something. At the minimum a "Lorem ipsum ..." to see how the text flows. What better than the real content for that? Especially if you already have it.

[chrisrhoden]

> Is this rendering the page remotely and fetching it? If so, it seems like the only point would be to reduce the server load on their end.

No. From the very line you quoted:

> ... the cached data coming from the web is the _content_ of the page, where the checked out repo I'm in is dealing with the _layout_ of the page.

> What better than the real content for that?

Nothing, which is why that's what they do. They figure that the content of the page as it exists when you first load the development server is sufficient, and so cache that content. It seems unnecessary to me to have my development server update the content if a new post goes to production in the middle of my work.

[koolba]

Ah misunderstanding on my part. I considered the entire page itself to be "content" and didn't realize they were referring to just fetching the copy. Makes much more sense now.