Comments on: CakePHP Application Deployment: RFC

By: @TheKeyboard » Blog Archive » CakePHP Application RFC Follow-Up

@TheKeyboard » Blog Archive » CakePHP Application RFC Follow-Up — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 15:52:33 +0000

[...] moley, has it been almost a year since I blogged about a potential CakePHP deployment task. Since a few people have hit me up in Twitter and in the comments for that blog post, I thought I [...]

By: Brian Porter

Brian Porter — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:38:33 +0000

Found this via Google when searching for deployment tools specifically designed for Cake apps. Any progress in this area lately?

By: Recent Links Tagged With "phing" - JabberTags

Recent Links Tagged With "phing" - JabberTags — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 22:04:51 +0000

[...] public links >> phing Stop stop stop… Saved by vongjohnny on Fri 14-11-2008 CakePHP Application Deployment: RFC Saved by mahoro568 on Mon 10-11-2008 Re: Performance – Requiring the Autoloader Saved by [...]

By: Mark Story

Mark Story — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 02:07:59 +0000

Chris, I was thinking about building a similar task for a while, I would love to help out with this. Let me know if you need a hand for anything.

By: leo

leo — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 14:46:12 +0000

Chris,

We tend to use shared hosts, so server side operations can be a bit tricky – we have no console access, for example.

In the meantime, are you aware of any tools that can ‘read’ a Subversion repository and a remote fs and determine which files need to be updated and where they must be put? I’m trying to avoid FTPing the whole site everytime I make a change.

Leo

By: kabturek

kabturek — Sat, 17 May 2008 15:35:46 +0000

I’ve left you some comments on the group.

I really like your approach to the topic – its good to see that opinions are collected in forms of RFC or others

By: Guillaume

Guillaume — Sat, 17 May 2008 11:38:59 +0000

Did you take a look at fredistrano?
http://code.google.com/p/fredistrano/

The idea of a devoted task for that seems a very very good one to me.

By: Sam D

Sam D — Sat, 17 May 2008 04:18:54 +0000

I would say that a deployment tool should do the following things

Should

Should be able to push to multiple destinations with rule sets for each (you know the drill staging/ dev/ beta/ production)

Should be able to reset the caches on destination (can’t even count the number of friggen questions that turn out to have this at the core on the cake list)

Should have some ability to run tests before deployment and conditionally do something

Would

Would be nice to support database actions on push (not migrations per say but to be able to sync staging with production db would be nice)

Would be nice to support repositories of various flavors (plug in interface for adding extending)

Would be nice to have some kind of rollback support like cap does

Would be nice to support simple filesystem operations on the target (mv, cp, chmod) of course this is likely to need some kind of shell interface since some people might be deploying in non-unix flavor environments

Would be nice to have an extendable interface for other upload/sync operations (sftp, rsync, scp, you know the drill)

Would be nice to have deployment controlled from local machine and dependent on minimum requirements server side (I have a hell of a lot more control over what is on my box then what goes on the server)

Would be nice if it could deploy non-cakephp assets (capistrano got much better when it’s dependance on rails was loosened) there are many parts of a site that may be outside of the CakePHP structure….

Is this what you were looking for.

By: Chris Hartjes

Chris Hartjes — Sat, 17 May 2008 01:21:23 +0000

@Travis

It’s not so much “roll your own” as “integrate into existing tools”. If ‘cake deploy’ were to fire off Phing as part of a deployment, that’s fine by me too. It doesn’t matter what happens behind the scenes of a deployment, just so long as it works properly.

By: Travis Swicegood

Travis Swicegood — Fri, 16 May 2008 23:43:04 +0000

This is an implementation detail, but Phing would be an excellent choice to embed to handle the deploy command. The only problem I could see is the mixing of LGPL and MIT. The custom tasks you created would have to be LGPL, but the interface to it – the part that handles the actual execution of Phing – could be MIT without problem.

‘course, I’m no lawyer and this isn’t intended as legal advice, yada yada yada…

But as someone with commit privileges on Phing, I’d really like to see other communities using it instead of trying to roll their own.