On Friday, 11 February 2011 at 3:25 PM, Mike Bailey wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Chris Berkhout <[email protected]> > wrote: > > The main job of Capistrano seems to be running commands remotely. > > That's the main job of net-ssh. :-) > > The main job of Capistrano is to allow you to define roles and tasks. > > > But if your destination git repo can run whatever you need when you > > push to it, then I'm not sure what benefit there is in Capistrano. > > I'm using git anyway, so it's one less tool. > > You're manually triggering a deploy by doing a git push to the target server. > It's not an unattended install by any stretch. > > Git can call whatever code you like but the point is you'll need to provide > it with something. Git isn't really giving you anything more than another > manual way to say "deploy". Right, this is why I think it's a much better design. It's about combining separate tools.
Git gets you & the code onto the server, at which point you can just run up the app locally. Cap combines both tasks, which makes the process of deploying more complex and brittle than it needs to be. It also introduces a massive slowdown because every command includes a network round-trip. > > I'd love to see something really simple that will take care of holding page, > bundler, migrations, app_restart and the like. I just don't need it enough to > write it myself. :-) > > > Workin' on it :) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en.
