[capistrano-mailing-list] Could not fetch specs from https://rubygems.org/

*Versions:* - Ruby 2.3.1 - Capistrano 3.6.1 - Rake / Rails / etc *Platform:* - Working on Windows 8.1 x64 - Deploying to.Ubuntu 16.04 *Logs:* 00:14 bundler:install 01 ~/.rvm/bin/rvm default do bundle install --path /home/user/rtms/shared/bundle --binstubs

Re: [capistrano-mailing-list] Getting the dreaded "Stage not set, ..." error, can't get around it.

hi Lee, thank you for the response. so is Capistrano + wp-cli not being really supported any more as a solution for migrating/transferring WordPress sites & their MySQL database? i'll look at roots.io, but i'm hoping it's as simple an (alleged) set-up for migrating/transferring as

Re: [capistrano-mailing-list] Could not fetch specs from https://rubygems.org/

Hey Eugeniu, When I encounter issues like this, I'll first try and eliminate Capistrano as the cause. Log into the server as your deploy user, and navigate to the releases directory (something like /home/user/rtms/releases/). Then run bundle install. If it fails, this is a Bundler issue and has

Re: [capistrano-mailing-list] Cap 2.6 - Run as another user

I'd suggest upgrading. You might be able to find people to help you with this older version, but most people (IMO) have upgraded and will be able to support Capistrano 3. ~William Johnston On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Gokulakrishnan Sarangaraju wrote: >

Re: [capistrano-mailing-list] Cap 2.6 - Run as another user

Sure William. I will upgrade to 3.1 or to a latest version for future queries. btw i was able to solve that issue with by allowing commands to be executed while switching user (sudo su - admin -c "command here"). It has nothing to do with Capistrano version. Regards, Gokul On Tuesday,

Re: [capistrano-mailing-list] Cap 2.6 - Run as another user

I'm glad to hear you got it working! Thanks for reporting back. ~Willam On Oct 18, 2016 8:30 PM, "Gokulakrishnan Sarangaraju" < gokul.sarangar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sure William. I will upgrade to 3.1 or to a latest version for future > queries. > > btw i was able to solve that issue with by