Re: [Fab-user] Any interest in extension to support getting things from source control?

[Jeff Forcier]

On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Jeremy Katz <address@hidden> wrote:

> Return status is always a little perilous to depend on in my
> experience... I haven't extensively looked at the changes in 0.9 there

It's certainly not a panacea. So I guess you were talking about
examining the stdout/stderr for expected error messages or something
like that?

> *nod*  Having an extensive contrib is definitely a good way to go for
> that and it also gives a way to start testing things, seeing if they
> "fly" and if they prove awesome, then they can move out of being just
> contrib and being more core.

Well, the way I'm treating contrib now is similar to Django's --
there's core functionality which provides the tools everything else
builds on, then fabric.contrib.* which is basically "blessed"
user-level functionality. This may not be 100% in line with the
historical meaning of "contrib", not sure, but that's basically the
breakdown.

It's quite possible that for 1.0 or 2.0, things will get reorganized,
too. Depends on how people react to the current namespacing -- if e.g.
fabric.contrib.my_module ends up being used by a vast majority of
users, that's possibly a sign that it should be namespaced as just
fabric.my_module. We'll see :)

> We send out emails for successful deployments and being able to show
> what's changed since the last deployment is incredibly helfpul.
> Especially when something breaks.

Certainly, I'm just used to doing that at tag time, not actual deploy
time (though they're usually near simultaneous) hence my confusion.

-Jeff