Closed jamgregory closed 7 years ago
We use that ourselves too, but you can't make it generic enough to work for everybody, I think. For example, we don't use RVM or Rbenv on the server, but you might, so even the Capfile will differ.
I guess there could be a Capfile.local
that is excluded from VCS but, if present, is included into the Capfile
? Or do something similar to this which loads extra tasks:
Dir.glob('lib/capistrano/tasks/*.rake').each { |r| import r }
Yes, and what about deploy.rb? Rvm and Rbenv sometimes also require settings in there such as the ruby version to use for that specific deploy. It will get more complex if we add all kinds of workarounds to make this generic, don't you think? You can currently create a commit which adds Capistrano with your settings and rebase that on master
of our upstream repo which seems a lot less complex to me.
OK, that's fair enough. Would it be worth including Capistrano in the Gemfile
at the very least? It could always be part of a separate group to be excluded if certain people don't use it?
Sure, in the :development
group it shouldn't cause any problems.
Hey @frenkel,
Would you object to a PR to include some Capistrano configuration? We normally use that to deploy our Rails apps, and it would certainly be beneficial to use to have that included.
Thanks!