Details

    • Type: New Feature New Feature
    • Status: Open Open
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: site:deploy
    • Labels:
      None
    • Number of attachments :
      0

      Issue Links

        Activity

        Hide
        John Casey added a comment -

        won't that require something akin to an rsync wagon?

        Show
        John Casey added a comment - won't that require something akin to an rsync wagon?
        Hide
        Brett Porter added a comment -

        I don't think so, actually. I think we should make the directory copy method of scpexe call rsync (if configured to do so instead of zip/copy/unzip). We probably need to get a java-ish implementation for the pure scp version.

        The rsync code should probably be separate so the file -> file can use it for example.

        Just some thoughts.

        Show
        Brett Porter added a comment - I don't think so, actually. I think we should make the directory copy method of scpexe call rsync (if configured to do so instead of zip/copy/unzip). We probably need to get a java-ish implementation for the pure scp version. The rsync code should probably be separate so the file -> file can use it for example. Just some thoughts.
        Hide
        Kay Grosskop added a comment -

        why would this feature be desirable?

        I am curious about Brett's initial motivation to report the issue and wether it is still needed.

        We had a pretty heavy site and a slow connection to our webserver. So I was looking for a way to copy over only artifacts that have changed since the last deploy.
        Moreover, resources that were deleted from the new build where still accessible on the webserver because the deployment dit not clean up old installations of the site.

        Show
        Kay Grosskop added a comment - why would this feature be desirable? I am curious about Brett's initial motivation to report the issue and wether it is still needed. We had a pretty heavy site and a slow connection to our webserver. So I was looking for a way to copy over only artifacts that have changed since the last deploy. Moreover, resources that were deleted from the new build where still accessible on the webserver because the deployment dit not clean up old installations of the site.
        Hide
        Andreas Schildbach added a comment -

        You have answered your question yourself.

        Additionally, it would be nice to have another upload protocol that is easy for firewalls. FTP is a pain.

        Show
        Andreas Schildbach added a comment - You have answered your question yourself. Additionally, it would be nice to have another upload protocol that is easy for firewalls. FTP is a pain.
        Hide
        Andreas Sewe added a comment -

        FWIW, the IETF has standardized a URI scheme for rsync in RFC 5781 (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5781.txt), so you don't have to make up your own for this.

        Show
        Andreas Sewe added a comment - FWIW, the IETF has standardized a URI scheme for rsync in RFC 5781 ( http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5781.txt ), so you don't have to make up your own for this.

          People

          • Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Brett Porter
          • Votes:
            8 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            10 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated: