How to create a proper website? [closed] - version-control

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
Web developing isn't what it used to be. It used to consist of hacking together a few PHP scripts (I have nothing against PHP, actually it's currently my main programming language), uploading them via FTP to some webhost and that was that. Today, things are more complicated. As I can see by looking at a number of professional and modern websites (SO being the main one, I consider SO being a great example of good practice in web developing, even if it's made with ASP.NET and hosted on Windows), developing a website is much more than that:
The website code is actually in a repository (that little svn revision in the footer makes my nerdy feelings tingle);
Static files (CSS, JavaScript, images) are stored on a separate domain;
Ok, these were my observations. Now for my questions:
What do you do with JavaScript and CSS files? Do you just not keep them under version control? That would seem stupid. Do you create a separate repository for them?
How do you set up the repository? Do you just create one in the root of the web server? Or do you create some sort of post-commit trigger that copies the latest files to their appropriate destinations?
What happens if you have multiple machines running the website and want to push some changes to all of them?
Every such project has to have configuration files. These differ from the local repository to the remote one. For example, on my development machine I have no MySQL root password, while on the production server I certainly have a password. This password would be stored in a config file, amongst other such things, which would be completely different on my machine and on the server. Maybe they are different between production machines, too (like I said earlier, maybe the website runs on multiple machines for load balancing). How do I handle that?
I'm looking to start a new web project using:
Python + SQLAlchemy + Werkzeug + Jinja2
Apache httpd + modwsgi
MySQL
Mercurial
What I'd like is some best practice advice on using the aforementioned tools and answers to my questions above.

You're right, things can get complicated when trying to deploy a scalable website. Here are what I've found to be a few good guidelines (disclaimer: I'm a rails engineer):
Most of the decisions regarding file structure for your code repository are largely based upon the convention of the language, framework and platform you choose to implement. Many of the questions you brought up (JS, CSS, assets, production vs development) is handled with Rails. However, that may differ from PHP to Python to whichever other language you want to use. I've found you should do some research about what language you're choosing to use, and try to find a way to fit the convention of that community. This will help you when you're trying to find help on an obstacle later. Your code will be organized like their code, and you'll be able to get answers more easily.
I would version control everything that isn't very substantial in size. The only problem I've found with VC is when your repo gets large. Apart from that I've never regretted keeping a version of previous code.
For deployment to multiple servers, there are many scripts that can help you accomplish what you need to do. For Ruby/Rails, the most widely used tool is Capistrano. There are comparable resources for other languages as well. Basically you just need to configure what your server setup is like, and then write or look to open source for a set of scripts that can deploy/rollback/manipulate your codebase to the servers you've outlined in your config file.
Development vs Production is an important distinction to make. While you can operate without that distinction, it becomes cumbersome quickly when you're having to patch up code all over your repository. If I were you, I'd write some code that is run at the beginning of every request that determines what environment you're running in. Then you have that knowledge available to you as you process that request. This information can be used when you specify which configuration you want to use when you connect to your db, all the way to showing debug information in the browser only on development. It comes in handy.
Being RESTful often dictates much of your design with regards to how your site's pages are discovered. Trying to keep your code within the restful framework helps you remember where your code is located, keeps your routing predictable, keeps your code from becoming too coupled, and follows a convention that is becoming more and more accepted. There are obviously other conventions that can accomplish these same goals, but I've had a great experience using REST and it's improved my code substantially.
All that being said. I've found that while you can have good intentions to make a pristine codebase that can scale infinitely and is nice and clean, it rarely turns out this way. If I were you, I'd do a small amount of research on what you feel the most comfortable with and what will help make your life easier, and go with that.
Hopefully that helps!

While I have little experience working with the tools you've mentioned, except for MySQL, I can give you a few fairly standard answers for the questions you posted.
1) Depends on the details, but most often you keep them in the same repository but in a separate folder.
2) Just because something is commited to the repository doesn't mean that it's ready to go live - it's quite often an intermediary build that could be riddled with bugs. A publish is done manually, with an export from the repository. Setting up the webserver in the same folder as a svn checkout is a huge nono as the .svn folder contains quite a bit of sensitive information, such as how to push changes to the svn server.
3) You use some sort of NAS or SAN solution, or simply a network share on one of the servers, and read all your data from there. That way, when you push information to one place, it's accessible by all servers. If your network is slow, you set up scripts that pushes the files out to all the servers automatically from a single location. If you use a multi-server environment in ASP.NET, don't forget to update the machine key in the config files or your shared encrypted caches, like the viewstate, won't work across servers. Having a session store in a database is also a good idea.
4) I've got a post build step that only triggers on publish that replaces my database connectionstrings with production ones, and also changes my Production app config value from false to true in the published web.config/app.config files. I can't see any case where you'd want different config files for different servers serving the same content.
If something is unclear, just comment and I'll try to clarify.
Good luck! // Eric Johansson

I think you are mixing 2 different aspects, source control and deployment. Just because you have all your files in a single repository doesnt mean they have to be deployed that way. Its also arguable whether you should be deploying directly using source control or instead using a build/deploy script which could handle any number of configurations.
Also hosting static files on a seperate domain only really becomes worthwhile on high traffic websites. Are you sure you aren't prematurely optimising?

Related

Website deployment techniques

I'm working on improving a small intranet where files are currently edited directly on the server (connected via Samba). As you can imagine, I'd like to vastly improve this workflow with things like:
Version control
Validation of JavaScript and CSS (or SAAS) files
Minification of JavaScript and CSS (or SAAS) files
Transfer to live server (ideally to the server mounted, rather than SSH etc.)
Naturally I'd like this to be as automated as possible.
I've been looking around for a few hours on this subject and have come across similar questions and read about various tools (Ant, Capistrano, Maven, Phing, others…), but I'm struggling to get an overview of the whole process. Are there any good books or tutorials that step through a workflow, perhaps pointing out suitable tools along the way and showing basic examples?
There's a bunch of guides on our site about deployments. Take a look, maybe you will find the useful. Here's one about deployments best practices:
http://guides.beanstalkapp.com/deployments/best-practices.html
Here's one about configuring your first Capistrano recipe:
http://guides.beanstalkapp.com/deployments/deploy-with-capistrano.html
And this one is about managing Capistrano deployment with Beanstalk:
http://guides.beanstalkapp.com/deployments/managing-capistrano-deployments.html
Good luck!

What are the basics of deploying/building/making a web app?

I am pretty comfortable with the producing web apps now. I am using a NodeJs stack on the back-end and usually have a fair amount of Javascript on the front end. Where I really lack understanding is the deployment process.
What is a typical deployment process?
From what I have gathered in my reading a deployment/build process can include several tasks:
Running through unit-test suites
Concatenating script and CSS files
Version numbering your app
Tracing module dependencies (node_modules)
Pushing it to a remote repo (GitHub)
Instructing 'staging' servers to pull down the latest repo
Instructing 'production' server to pull down the latest repo
This has all left me a little overwhelmed. I don't know whether I should be going into this level of detail for my own projects, it seems like a lot of work! I am using Sublime Text 2 IDE and it seems to have a Build Script process, is this suitable? How does one coordinate all these separate tasks? I'm imagining ideally they would all run at the flick of a switch.
Sorry so many questions, but I need to know how people learnt similar principles. Some of my requirements may be specific to NodeJS but I'm sure processes are similar no matter what choice of stack you are developing in.
First off, let's split the job in two: front-end and back-end stuff. For both, you really want some kind of bulid system, but their goals and scope are vastly different.
For the front-end, you want your source to be as small as possible; concatenate/minify JavaScript, CSS and images. A colleague of mine has written a "compiler", Assetgraph, to do this for you. It has a somewhat seep learning-curve, but it does wonders for your code (our dev-builds are usually ~20 megs, production ~500 k).
As to the back-end, you want contained, easily managed bundles of some sort. We re-package our stuff into debian-packages. As long as the makefile is wired up correctly, you get a lot of the boring build- and deploy-time stuff for free. Here's my (pre-NPM 1.0) Debianizing node programs. I've seen other ways to do this in NPM and on Github, but I haven't looked into them, so I can't speak on their quality.
For testing/pusing around/deploying, we use a rather convoluted combination of Debian package-archives, git-hooks, Jenkins-servers and what not. While I highly recommend using the platforms' native package-manager for rolling out stuff, it can be a bit too much. All in all, we usually deploy staging either automatically (on each git push), or semi-automatic for unstable codebases. Production deployments are always done explicitly.
For the assets I use asereje https://github.com/masylum/asereje
I recently documented my nodejs deployment process in a blog post:
http://pau.calepin.co/how-to-deploy-a-nodejs-application-with-monit-nginx-and-bouncy.html
A build script sounds like a good idea indeed.
What should that build script do?
make sure all the test pass, else exit immediately
concatenate your javascript and css files into one single js/css file and minify them also
increment the version number (unless you decide to set that up yourself manually)
push to the remote repo (which instructs the staging and production servers through a git hook)
This is at least my opinion.
Other resources:
http://howtonode.org/deploying-node-with-spark
http://howtonode.org/deploying-node-upstart-monit
http://dailyjs.com/2010/03/15/hosting-nodejs-apps/
How to deploy node app depencies

new to mercurial and VCS: shared code multi-server setup

In our small office we're setting up mercurial - our first time using a "real" version control system. We've got three servers - a live server, a staging server and a development server.
We've also got three relatively large web sites - one for visitors, one for users and an intranet site, for the office staff.
The three web sites share some code. (for instance - a php class library, some commonly used code snippets, etc.)
Before version control, we just used symbolic links to link to the shared libraries. For example: each site had a symbolic link to an "ObjectClasses" directory - any changes made to a file in ObjectClasses would be instantly available to all the sites. You'd just upload the changed file to staging and to live, and you were done.
But... Mercurial doesn't follow symbolic links. So I've set up a subrepository for the shared libraries in the three sites on the three servers (actually 'four' servers if you count the fact that there are two programmers with two separate clones of the repository on the development server).
So there are 12 working copies of the shared object library.
So here's the question:
Is there any way to simplify the above set up?
Here's an example of what our workflow will be and it seems too complicated - but maybe this is what it's like using version control and we just need to get used to it:
Programmer A makes a change to Object Foo in the subrepo in Site 1. He wants to make this available everywhere, so he commits it, then pushes it to the staging server. I set up hooks on the staging server to automatically propogate the changes to the three sites, on the staging server, and again to the three sites on the live server. That takes care of the 6 working copies on the staging and live servers. So far, so good.
but what about the development server, where there may be work-in-progress on these files?
Programmer A now needs to manually pull the shared subrepo to Sites 2 and 3 on the development server. He also needs to tell Programmer B to manually pull the shared subrepo on Sites 1, 2 and 3 on his copy of the site on the development server. What if he's editing Object Foo on Site 1 and making different edits to Object Foo on Site 2. He's going to have to resolve two separate conflicts.
We make changes to the objects relatively frequently. This is going to drive us nuts. I really love the idea of version control - but after two weeks of wrestling with trying to find the best setup, the old sloppy way of having one copy of the shared files and calling out "hey - ya working on that file, I wanna make a change" is looking pretty good right now.
Is there really no simpler way to set this up?
Without more information about the specific web platform and technologies you're using (e.g., .NET, LAMP, ColdFusion, etc.), this answer may be inadequate, but let me take a stab nevertheless. First, if I understand you correctly, it's your working paradigm that's the problem. You're having developers make changes to files and then push them to three different sites. I suggest separating the development concerns altogether from the build/deploy concerns.
It sounds like you're using subrepositories in Mercurial to handle shared code--which is smart, by the way--so that's good. That takes care of sharing code across multiple projects. But rather than have each programmer pushing stuff to a given server after he updates it, have the programmers instead be pushing to some other "staging" repository. You could have one for each of your servers if you wish, though I think it probably makes more sense to keep all development in a single staging or "master" repository which is then used to build/deploy to your staging and/or live server.
If you wish to automate this process, there are a number of tools that can do this. I usually prefer NAnt with CruiseControl for build integration, but then my work is mostly .NET which makes it a great fit. If you can provide more specifics I can provide more details if you like, but I think the main problem for you to overcome is the way you're handling the workflow. Use Mercurial to keep multiple developers happy pulling/pushing from a single repository and then worry about deploying to your servers for testing as a separate step.

Load CMS core files from one server from multiple servers

I'm almost done with our custom CMS system. Now we want to install this for different websites (and more in the future), but every time I change the core files I will need to update each server/website seperatly.
What I really want is to load the core files from our server, so if I install an CMS I only define the nedded config files (on that server) and the rest is loaded from our server. This way I can pass changes in the core very simple, and only once.
How to do this, or this a completely wrong way? If so, what is the right way? Thing I need to look out for? Is it secure (without paying thousands for a https connection)?
I have completely no idea how to start or were to begin, and couldn't find anything helpful (maybe wrong search) so everything is helpful!
Thanks in advance!
Note: My application is build using the Zend Framework
You can't load the required files from remote on runtime (or really don't want to ;). This problem goes down to a proper release & configuration managment where you update all of your servers. But this can mostly be done automatically.
Depending on how much time you want to spend on this mechanism there are some things you have to be aware of. The general idea is, that you have one central server which holds the releases and have all other servers check if for updates, download and install them. There are lot's of possibilities like svn, archives, ... and the check/update can be done manually at the frontend or by crons in the background. Usually you'll update all changed files except the config files and the database as they can't be replaced but have to be modified in a certain way (this is the place where update scripts come into place).
This could look like this:
Cronjob is running on the server which checks for updates via svn
If there is a new revision it'll do a svn-update
This is an very easy to implement mechansim which holds some drawbacks like you can't change the config-files and database. Well infact it'd be possible but quite difficult to achieve.
Maybe this could be easier with a archive-based solution:
Cronjob checks updateserver for a new version. This could be done by reading the contents of a file on the update-server and compare it to a local copy
If there is a new version, download the related archive
Unpack the archive and copy the files
With that approach you might be able to include update-scripts into updates to modify configs/databases.
Automatic updatedistribution is a very very complex topic and that are only two very simple approaches. There are probably very many different solutions out there and 'selecting' the right one is not an easy task (it does even get more complex if you have different versions of a product with dependencies :) and there is no "this is the way it has to be done".

Collaborative Code Editing [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I work for a small web development company (6 people) and we've been in the market for a new code editor/development environment for quite some time.
Currently, we're using Dreamweaver's (CS3) coding side for our site development. Each site's files is hosted on a Dreamhost ftp server. All 6 of us work on the same set of live files on the remote ftp server. Dreamweaver has a handy file locking functionality that prevents us from overwriting each others changes by keeping us out of the same files.
Now, we've found that this form of development allows for very rapid development and love how easy it is to get things done. However there are many things we don't like. One of which is Dreamweaver's code editor. We also don't like our lack of code history for each site.
Does anyone know of a good alternative to Dreamweaver that has similar file locking/ftp functionality?
If not, could you explain to me the best configuration of a source control system for our team? We're willing to look at GIT, Mercurial, and Subversion. The new system would ideally:
1). Support multiple different code editors on different operating systems. (Windows 1st choice.)
2). Be almost as easy and quick to push out code as currently.
3). Allow for working on the files outside of the office network.
4). Be inexpensive.
I'm probably just showing my ignorance of how to use a version control system, but it doesn't seem logical for each of us to have a testing server on our computers with every single site setup with our own test database... That's very time consuming
What's your solution to our problem? I think we'll either have to upgrade to the latest version of Dreamweaver and stick with it forever, or we'll have to find some sort of ftp collaborative editor, or we'll have to implement version control.
Do the benefits of version control outweigh the extra amount of time it entails to push out code?
it doesn't seem logical for each of us
to have a testing server on our
computers with every single site setup
with our own test database... That's
very time consuming
That's generally the way to do it. Most modern frameworks will let you set up your development server in minutes, if not seconds -- using an embedded http server and database, for example. If you are stuck on an ancient platform, there are solutions like wamp that are only a little more difficult. Remember, that it's time that you spend once, but it lets you be faster. If the project is going to take any longer than a few hours, it should be beneficial. You don't waste time on debugging things your fellow developer just changed, or recovering production data from that silly database manipulation mistake you just made.
(Oh, and if your websites are just HTML+JavaScript, then you don't need any server locally, obviously.)
As for version control systems, the ones you mentioned are fine, with SVN requiring a little more setup and network access to the central server for commits. Git and Mercurial let you work and commit offline, and then push your changes to the central server or even just exchange them between developers. I think Mercurial works better on Windows at the moment.
Michael I hear your pain.
I can't claim to have fully researched all avenues, but I have really begun to love Git recently.
My first hurdle was learning about how Revision Control Systems (RCS) work. Before I would pick SVN vs Git vs HG vs Bazzar vs etc I evaluated what I wanted to do. And that was to work locally then share my work, and push to a webserver.
I found this great comparison website: http://whygitisbetterthanx.com
From that I could clearly see that Git was worth the time to learn. As the backwards learner I am I dove into a project and learned how quickly things could become messy, then I began reading: http://gitready.com/ and http://book.git-scm.com/ and http://progit.org/book/
Then I realized I needed an organizational strategy. I went searching and found something I (and a lot of others) liked: http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
This is also a great resource:
http://danielmiessler.com/study/git/
There's a bit of a primer. Let me try to answer your questions more directly.
1.) Git is a command-line tool. For windows there's cygwin.
I found the documentation at github to be the best. Even if you don't plan on using them for code hosting. Have a look at http://help.github.com/ Use the setup git link to get started.
2.) Since you ask for versioning there is a bit more work. Its a different model, a different way of thinking. Rather than not be able to edit the file which is currently what happens, your commits might collide, and in that case git provides great diff tools to help resolve the conflict.
3.) Git is whats called a DCVS or distributed version control system. Here's an example:
lets say you need to do some work over the weekend. You do a git pull from the server before you leave work. At home you can continue to work, create new branches etc. Then when you have an internet connection you can push your changes back to the server.
4.) Git is free!
As for pushing your work to the webserver you'll need to setup something like this:
http://toroid.org/ams/git-website-howto
Looks pretty easy, I'm gonna try it out next weekend.
I hope you find some of what I wrote helpful, if not maybe the links are.