On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 08:08:07AM -0700, Jamis Buck wrote: > Capistrano isn't responsible for setting executable bits on your files. If > you're using subversion, you can make sure the files are marked as > executable in your repository, and then they'll be made executable > automatically on check-out. Google for the svn:executable property to see > how that works.
I'll note that the crucial phrase here is "If you're using subversion." I already worked around this, but I'm using Perforce. (We're moving to subversion this month, I believe, but for now...) I am unhappy with Perforce for a variety of reasons, and not maintaining executable bits is one of them. Oh, did I mention that it also makes everything read-only unless you have checked a file out for editing? The point is that there is at least one SCM that is (theoretically) supported by Capistrano that doesn't have any mechanism for maintaining permissions bits. Incidentally, I never did figure out how to make Windows, Perforce, and Capistrano play nice together. The options being abandoning Windows, Perforce, or Capistrano, we've opted to abandon Perforce. (Abandoning Windows would have been nice, too, but no one is forced to use it; we just have some developers who are more comfortable with it.) > - Jamis --Greg > On Jan 1, 2008, at 8:09 PM, hnchuong wrote: > >> >> Hi all, >> >> My Capistrano deployment failed when Capistrano need to start the >> server, because scripts in /script folder doesn't have executable >> permission. Therefore in my recipe, i need to have a >> "after_update_code" task to set the permission of scripts in scripts >> folder to be executable. >> >> I wonder why i need to do this, as I think this should be default be >> Capistrano. Could anyone explain? >> >> Thanks >> >> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/capistrano -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
