[Catalyst] Re: Deployment in practice

[Mesdaq, Ali]

Solving the issue of someone accidentally checking something into production branch is a lot easier to solve than all the problems associated with not having version control. To compare which do you think will be an easier issue to solve: Someone accidentally checking something into production branch that breaks stuff or someone making a change to production server with no version control that breaks stuff? At least with the first issue you can roll back the change and get back to stable instantly. With the other issue you could be troubleshooting for a long time.

Thanks,
------------------------------------------
Ali Mesdaq (CISSP, GIAC-GREM)
Sr. Security Researcher
Websense Security Labs
http://www.WebsenseSecurityLabs.com
------------------------------------------


-----Original Message-----
From: kevin montuori [mailto:montuori at gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 1:19 PM
To: The elegant MVC web framework
Subject: [Catalyst] Re: Deployment in practice

>>>>> "MA" == Mesdaq, Ali <amesdaq at websense.com> writes:

 MA>  Once it passes the tests the code can be merged into the
 MA>  production branch and will auto deploy.

That's a great solution until someone checks a change into the
production branch accidentally.  As someone already mentioned, it'll
happen eventually.  

I'm a firm believer in not using version control as a deployment tool.
It's more work to create a package, deploy that to test, test, deploy
*the same package* to production, but you at least know that what you
tested is what's in production.  Pulling straight from VC you never
really have that assurance.


k.

-- 
kevin montuori

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst at lists.scsys.co.uk
Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst@lists.scsys.co.uk/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


 Protected by Websense Hosted Email Security -- www.websense.com