Do that twice for your two production instances, once for your showcase
environment, once for your test and ci environments.
Realise that you need to change something fundamental in your production
instance ("oh hey, let's add varnish") that you'll need to replicate down
the chain - move to puppet or chef to automate the process of configuring
your servers. Struggle for a while to get RVM source compiling working in a
package-centric models of these systems. Have it work, declare success, have
it break a few weeks later because the RVM website is down or a new rubygems
version broke everything.
I think we're confusing 'production' here - for some people it means n
servers in multiple datacenters with munin, newrelic, nagios, an on-call
roster, varying levels of dev/operator experience, etc (my job). For some it
means a single linode machine that I git push to (my band's website). Both
technically 'production', but wildly different environments and
requirements.
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Dmytrii Nagirniak <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Ahh, reading Ivan's message, it's obvious now - to automatically select a
>> ruby per project.
>> Are there other common uses?
>>
>
> I think that's the primary one.
>
> Ben, in terms of complexity, maybe I am missing something, but installing
> RVM took me the least amount of time.
>
> http://blog.approache.com/2011/05/setting-up-ubuntu-1104-server-for-rails.html
>
> And later installing Ruby was a breath. I don't really feel like it adds
> complexity.
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> —Ben
>>
>>
>> On 28/07/2011, at 1:33 PM, Simon Russell wrote:
>>
>> > I work with Michael Pearson; I'm one of the people who torments him by
>> > insisting on checking in .rvmrc files. I'm probably also one of the
>> > people who doesn't have a problem with RVM in production, but I
>> > haven't tried using some of the more recent releases. Certainly the
>> > random changes don't help. It seems that if Wayne stopped insisting
>> > people always use the latest version, it wouldn't be such a problem to
>> > automate.
>> >
>> > As for .rvmrc, I haven't yet heard a good reason why checking it in is
>> > bad, and I can think of a few reasons it's convenient. I can be
>> > convinced though; and I haven't done a lot of searching to find
>> > opinions conflicting with mine :)
>> >
>> > Simon.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 13:15, Julio Cesar Ody <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >> Which is what I said on the first email I sent to the thread. Michael
>> >> was talking specifically about sandboxing gems.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thursday, July 28, 2011, Dmytrii Nagirniak <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> On 28 July 2011 12:25, Julio Cesar Ody <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> @ Michael: agreed, that's what Bundler is for. Again, should you
>> >>> always run your apps on the same version of Ruby, it is a waste of
>> >>> time.
>> >>>
>> >>> That's not why RVM exists. If everything you run is on one ruby
>> version then there's no point of using RVM at all.In this case RVM is a tool
>> that solves no problem.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> But if you do need multiple versions of Ruby - RVM is the right tool
>> for the job.
>> >>> At least that's my view on it.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Pat Allan <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >>>> I don't like the idea of checked-in .rvmrc files at all - granted, I
>> don't work with any large teams though :)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> Pat
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 28/07/2011, at 12:15 PM, Michael Pearson wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> The .rvmrc thing was the easiest to work around, and if we'd really
>> needed them, I would have either hacked/forked RVM. I'm the only developer
>> at my work that thinks that .rvmrc checked into a repo is a bad idea :)
>> (gemsets? that's what bundler is for! and we're all using ruby-1.9.2
>> anyway!)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> It was the constant changes to the install process / defaults that
>> killed it for me.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Julio Cesar Ody <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>> >>>>> Yeah, I read it.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> http://serverfault.com/questions/227510/is-it-possible-to-skip-rvmrc-confirmation
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> Michael Pearson
>> >>>>> The Bon Scotts; http://www.thebonscotts.com
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> 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.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> 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.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> 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.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> 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.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> 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.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > --
>> > 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.
>> >
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>>
>>
> --
> 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.
>
--
Michael Pearson
The Bon Scotts; http://www.thebonscotts.com
--
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.
