As another non-rails capistrano user, keeping it a flexible commandline tool is important. Since that seems to be understood, I'm all for Mathias and Jonathan stepping up.
Git forks are great for experimentation, but `gem install capistrano` better know where to go or we'll lose lots of newcomers. -- Andy On Feb 26, 4:38 am, Mathias Meyer <pomonra...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On 26.02.2009, at 12:55, Lee Hambley wrote: > > > > > Hi All, > > > I'm a little suspect of the Webistrano/Macistrano guys taking over > > development, as I feel particularly that Webistrano limits the > > capabilities of capistrano and limits it usefulness for non-rails > > projects. > > > Whilst there's still a market for simple-one-push rails deploys, > > with accountability; But I would be hoping for some kind of > > reassurance that Web/Macistrano would remain separate projects, and > > would not affect capistrano in any way. > > > I do feel that someone that knows the Capistrano internals should > > take over, I'd have volunteered, except my skills lay in using > > Capistrano, for complex deploys; not particularly in changing > > internals, and fixing bugs, and those sorts of things. > > I can understand your concerns, but it is not our intention to take > Capistrano and replace it with a combination of Webistrano and > Macistrano. I'm fond of both, but I regularly use just Capistrano > myself, and work on lots of projects that use Capistrano in ways I > hadn't imagined before, and that's totally cool. > > Capistrano will always be Capistrano, your one-stop deployment command > line tool, everything else is more like an ecosystem surrounding > Capistrano. We certainly have ideas where we'd like to take a > Capistrano 3, but it will not be a big union of a web gui and a > desktop tool. It will still be a neat command line tool called cap. > > > Whoever takes it over should be prepared to start living in IRC, and > > start up a drive to get documentation written... and try and drive > > it as *the* way to handle deployment. > > That's what we've been doing for the last years, not always in public, > but rest assured that that's what we're going for. As for IRC, I'm > fine with getting on it more often in the future. > > > I'm looking forward to whatever happens with Capistrano, Jamis has > > left us with an exceptional bit of code, we owe it to him to make > > the right decision about where to take it next. > > > I will be forking copies of the libraries on Github, to make some > > changes to the way cap logs out to the screen, some things that have > > come up from time to time on the mailing list, about problems with > > how, and where capistrano logs, as well as some stuff I want to do > > with the output to the screen (does that count as logging?) > > > Before we all fork-off and make our own changes, I fear that there > > will be no go-to-guy for a 'right' version of capistrano that scares > > me a lot, as it raises the barrier to entry far higher than it needs > > to be... (will_paginate... Vs. mislavs_will_paginate anyone?) > > That's exactly what we want as well, we won't push ourselves on the > community, for us it just made sense to take on the responsibilities > to be those guys, because we spend a lot of our time working with and > working on Capistrano. > > Hope that cleared things up a bit. We obviously proposed our idea to > Jamis before we officially posted anything, and if we go forward with > this, there will still be the same website, the same gem repository > and the same Capistrano. > > Cheers, Mathias > --http://paperplanes.dehttp://twitter.com/roidrage --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To unsubscribe from this group, send email to capistrano-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/capistrano -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
