7 ms·
If you don't mind - let's shift the context :). If you didn't have to use a Build Server to deploy with (in other words you had a competent tool that could depl
by robconery 16y ago
If you don't mind - let's shift the context :). If you didn't have to use a Build Server to deploy with (in other words you had a competent tool that could deploy, run tasks, etc) - I would assume you'd use that tool.
I do understand it's what you (and me and others need to use) - but it's because there really isn't another choice.
Thus my post.
- MartinCron 16y agoAbsolutely. And it was a good post. If I didn't require a "build" step, I would still want some sort of solution that could do things like pay attention to checkins, run automated tests, deploy to staging, run tests against staging, deploy to production, run tests against production, and let me know if/when anything doesn't work as expected. Based on the limited set of tools I have experience with, I probably would still use TeamCity, because it's great at all of the non-building tasks it needs to do as well. But I'll check out Capistrano based on your post.