[development] RFC: letting modules phone home to check for new releases

[Corey Bordelon]

I'm a little late to nitpick details, but capistrano doesn't need to be on
the host/server.  It needs to be installed on the user's computer as a sort
of client.  The other software requirement (besides ruby) is a version
control system that has the files you want to install elsewhere (that's
probably optional, too).  I believe capistrano uses ssh to login and run the
commands in it's scripts.  Think of it like a super ssh/scripting client
that runs multiple  commands on multiple machines in parallel.   If that
thought scares you, all I can say is "be afraid, be very afraid" ;)

<opinion-based-almost-rant>
I don't think Bèr wants capistrano to be the "one installer to rule them
all" for everyone.  I think our needs are similar; I need something that can
allow me to deploy/update multiple drupal sites on multiple hosts.  That's
not the use case for the newbie setting up their first site.

PEAR has an interesting installer, especially with the channels concept that
was introduced in their last major update (over 1.5 years ago).  Why can't
we adapt a system to play nicely with that, so that a drupal install is as
easy as "pear install drupal/drupal.core"?  (I know their are other
technical things needed before that can happen, but it's an option that
we're getting very close to being able to do).

If said framework existed, we could use the same infrastructure to power
whatever "human-interaction required" update system that many seem to favor
with the system for those of us who have "multiple sites to update and
better things to do than be playing with some @!#$%^  tarballs of modules".
</opinion-based-almost-rant>

-- Corey Bordelon <http://drupal.org/user/23318>

On 11/22/06, Gabor Hojtsy <gabor at hojtsy.hu> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, [iso-8859-1] Bèr Kessels wrote:
> > Questions:
> > Would capistrano serve as a default Drupal install/update framework? Are
> we
> > afraid of Ruby (as in: not rails, but the language)? Do we want to
> depend on
> > a third party tool for our deployment framework?
> >
> > Personal my answers are: yes, no, yes. But I'd like to hear if this can
> even
> > be considered for core :)
>
> We are solving an end user problem with in installer/updater. How many of
> our users (and user prospects) will host on servers having capistrano
> installed? If we are depending on capistrano, how many servers will we be
> compatible with?
>
> Gabor
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20061122/4b783406/attachment.htm