I am making a small web project which I am doing on the LAMP stack using the Symfony 1.4 MVC framework. I am interested in documenting everything, right from the database to the code and I want to push all my code onto GitHub. I know how to setup a repository on GitHub and push changes etc live.
What I am unable to wrap around my head is this:
I have the development server, which after testing it out I push it onto my GitHub repository, after this I want to naturally have to push it onto my production server. Typically, this being a one man project, I can easily push the project live to my production server using rsync. And this is how I would typically configure it in my YAML files and then symfony will automatically push the changes to my production server.
Naturally, I want GitHub as the intermediary where the code to my project is saved and from there I should be able to deploy it to my production server.
But how exactly I should achieve this, I have no clue.
Can anybody suggest the missing pieces to this puzzle?
You can use Capifony to deploy your symfony project.
Related
I would like some guidance when working projects with Moovweb. I'd like to understand what are some of the best practices at managing my Moovweb projects on Github. Specifically how to move them and maintain them from development to staging to production.
Really appreciate the information.
J
I'd check out some of the advice here that walks you through how to setup a professional development environment:
https://console.moovweb.com/learn/training/building_a_site/project_setup
The main idea is to setup your project so that it has 3 git remotes. A git remote is simply a URL where your code is being hosted.
origin: This remote will be where you and your developers host your code base. You’ll coordinate changes to your code here and manage different branches and bug fixes during development.
stage: This remote is where you’ll deploy your code base for testing. This will be a Moovweb Cloud URL that actually builds your code live so you can QA it before you put it on your production site.
production: This remote is where you’ll deploy your final production site that has been tested and approved for public use.
Then the release process would be as follows:
Test your changes locally in the browser
Push those changes to staging to QA them and make sure they work properly in a production environment.
Push those changes to Github so that other developers working on the project will have the latest code.
Push to production.
Is there a way deploy a website directly from github or cloud9 ide? using ftp or other way, right now it doesn't matter what hosting, just so it'll be fully functional and accessible online.
(I know github has a web-hosting of a kind but it seems very limited)
What webframework/language are you using? If you use RoR or Sinatra or any other rake-based framework you can use heroku.com. If your using asp.net you can use appharbor.com, finally if your using php you can use phpfog.com.
What these hostingproviders have in common is that you deploy the website by pushing your code with git, while you won't be deploying directly from github you can just add one of the above mentioned hosts to your remote-list (in addition to github) and then push to that remote when you wish to deploy.
Another solution would be to add a post-receive-hook to github which then triggers whenever you push to github, in that post-recieve-hook you could tell the webhost to pull from the repo. This does however require you to have git installed on the webserver aswell as some kind of webinterface for the post-recieve-hook to post to.
I'm learning FluentMigrator. The thing that I like about FM is that it supports the idea of Forward and Back for migrations (aka Up/Down). I'm finding that it's not ideal about this; there are some holes. Still, it's good.
This leads me to wonder if there are any deployment tools (nant, msbuild or other) that support this idea of rolling forward and back. The scenario that I'm using it in is the deployment of a web app with a related database.
Ideally I'd like to set up my deployment so that, should any part of it fail, it will revert to the previous known working configuration. With FM, this is pretty easy to do (but there are rough spots), so that covers the db. How about the files that make up the web app? Do any deploy tools have support for this?
Deploying to a Windows Server. Assume that I can't make any changes to the server.
I don't know of any Microsoft-centric, automated provisioning/deployment tools like Capistrano. Here are some tools I've heard of, but never used:
MSDeploy, for deploying web application.
Microsoft Deployment Services, for managing operating system configuration
Microsoft's System Center Configuration Manager
BladeLogic
HP's Operations Center
Up until about three months ago, we did our deployment/provisioning using custom MSBuild scripts. After a server is provisioned, deploys happen automatically using Robocopy to copy files to a share on the application server, updating changed application binaries and markup files. We've never had a need to rollback any of our deployments, but since our scripts are custom, we could write the logic if we needed to.
MSBuild is a terrible deployment/provisioning language. For the past three months, we've been writing all new scripts in, and porting existing ones to, PowerShell. It is wonderful. With version 2, there is support for running commands on remote servers, like SSH. We haven't used that functionality yet, but I'm looking forward to pushing setup scripts to remote server to provision and deploy at the same time.
We have been using Git to do our deploys for the last 6 months.
Here is the whole process:
CI server build the project
CI server checks it in to a local git repository
CI server pushes the changes to the centralised git repository
User creates an empty repository on the live server
User adds the central git repository to the remotes
User pulls the latest version over https (no need to open any ports)
It is a lot to setup in the beginning but once setup it works great. Deploys take seconds as only changed files get copied.
Another great thing about this method is that git keeps history of changes so rolling back is pretty simple. You can also roll back a few revisions and it's done straight on the live server. If something goes wrong reverting is super fast.
Also you can save some time if you use a hosted git service (github) for your central repository.
This is a very brief description but I can give you more info if you want.
Of course! My favorite is Capistrano. This was originally built for Ruby but I've found that it works just as well for other languages.
https://github.com/capistrano/capistrano
I've never worked with any version control systems before. Now I'm trying to learn Mercurial, but I'm confused (I've already read about 10-15 articles + hginit.com). I don't know how to organize the workflow.
I have a testing server and a production server. I work from my office computer and from my home laptop. I make changes directly on the testing server, and every week or so copy new code to my production server. I also need wiki/issues/etc. pretty much everything bitbucket.org has. I know that's a bad way of doing things.
Is there any tutorial or articles on how to organize the workflow? I'd also appreciate any schemes/sketches describing the process.
Thank you!
[Edit: Changed based on comments]
Using Bitbucket
Once you have created an account.
You should be able to create a repo with an appropriate url. Then you can clone it to create a local repository.
Check out getting started.
See the following to push the updates to BitBucket.
BitBucket comes with very extensive documentation.
Also there are, other useful tools to work with BitBucket:
BitbucketExtension that allows you to use command line for a number of operations.
Using Mercurial Queues and bitbucket.org
Organizing workflow
You will have to evolve a workflow that suits you. In your case, it looks like you have a testing server and production server.
So , you can setup two repositories, one for the testing server ad one for production. You can make push to testing server automatic so that you can test out the changes immediately. You can tag releases that are then pushed to production server.
Your local repo can be used to publish changes to testing server.
You can push the approved changes, tagged to BitBucket repository.
I am using mercurial for website development. I "think" I'm using it correctly.
I develop on my development machine, commit fairly regularly. I will somewhat regularly push my commits to my hosted site-dev repository.
If things are set up how I want them for the live site, I push from my dev machine to the hosted site-live repository. Then I pull down from that repository onto the live server.
However, there are some changes that need to be made (changing directories from localhost to www.example.com, changing the DB connection stuff, etc.).
What I did was made these changes on my live machine, then pushed them back up to the site-live repository. I don't know why I did that, really, but at least there's a changeset sitting there with the necessary config changes.
What I don't know how to do is manage this process. I'm a little lost beyond committing, pushing and pulling with hg. I'm a single developer and haven't even done a merge yet.
Is there some way to keep that particular changeset identified, and just apply it, hopefully even BEFORE I pull from the repo down to the live server?
I think you can tell from my question that I'm in a little over my head with hg and workflow at the moment ;)
This is my understanding:
What essentially you are trying to do is have a development, staging and deployment environment. You do your development using 'development' repository, test it on a staging environment and then once satisfied, pull those changes into deployment repository.
And when you pull from staging to deployment, you need to change your environment / configuration data.
My take is you should not be changing the configuration at all.
You should have configuration files such that you have a
basic configuration file
basic.conf
Environment specific overrides
basic.dev.conf, basic.staging.conf and basic. deployment.conf
Use environment variable:
The overrides to the basic configuration data should be defined via an environment
specific variable : APP_ENV : dev or staging or deploy
This way you should be able to override the configuration based on the environment without changing the configuration information.
It is not a good idea to rely on making changes to config files each time you pull your code from development to staging to deployment.
I would keep the live server outside the version control. Meaning that I would have a small "install" script that pulls updates from the repository, removes any unnecessary development files, and applies the correct configuration files. Both development and production configuration files should be in version control.