Trying to decide if this is sufficient, or if learning capistrano and
setting that up will give me any advantages over this?
Well on a larger setup (multiple servers etc) there is no question in
my mind that you want to use something like capistrano
Even on a small one machine setup, personally I'd always prefer to
automate things a little more because it's just too easy to update the
source but forget to run migrations and things like that.
I am hoping to add a more practical view to this thread. I too, have
read the reams of postings about how Capistrano is the ONLY way to go.
I have found that a simple subversion approach is easiest. I simply go
to where my application is loaded on my server and enter = svn update
That's it and it sure makes it easy.
David
I am hoping to add a more practical view to this thread.
Nothing you've said is "more practical".
I too, have
read the reams of postings about how Capistrano is the ONLY way to go.
No one is saying it's the *only* way to go, just that it has lots of
advantages.
I have found that a simple subversion approach is easiest. I simply go
to where my application is loaded on my server and enter = svn update
That's it and it sure makes it easy.
Sounds like you haven't even tried Capistrano, or you'd know that
deployment with Cap is *even easier* than your method: no need to
explicitly log into the server, just enter "cap deploy" from the dev
machine and voilĂ . One command does it all.
Besides, many applications have other things that need to be done on
deployment. Cap automates this.
(Oh, and you really should try switching to Git. Subversion is
*extremely* limited by comparison).