On 6/7/07, Jamis Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ah, yes, that does make more sense. What kind of tasks are you > running, where you want them to continue even if a command fails on > one server? I'm curious what uses people are putting Capistrano to, > besides those that I designed it for.
We're using it to manage some daemons. For things like mass starting/stopping/configuring of the daemons it's not an all or nothing thing, we want as many to complete as possible. We are presuming that erros will need human intervention and will be fixed case by case. It's different to the case with say, rails, where you wish everything to be uniform, this is a collection of standalone machines, as it were. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/capistrano -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
