On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 5:35 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm using virtual hosts for different apps (projects, reports, etc)
Makes sense. Let's plan to update the "Advanced configuration" section of DEVELOPMENT.md to be based on a vhost. I've attached the current puppet generated vhost definition that is on whimsy-vm2. I suspect with only minimal changes it would work as is on your machine - complete with authentication. Perhaps a "vhost generator" CGI script would be helpful? First it presents a form with a few fields that can be used to customize the result, and then after you click submit it presents a file you can download and drop into your "sites-available" directory? > I guess this is closer to what I need. > >> Alias /roster/ /srv/whimsy/www/roster/committer >> <Location /roster> >> PassengerBaseURI /roster >> PassengerAppRoot /srv/whimsy/www/roster/committer >> PassengerAppEnv development >> Options -Multiviews >> </Location> > > Doesn't work. > > However this does: > > Alias /roster/ /srv/whimsy/www/roster > <Location /roster> > PassengerBaseURI /roster > PassengerAppRoot /srv/whimsy/www/roster > PassengerAppEnv development > Options -Multiviews > </Location> > > Yay! Comparing that to what is deployed on whimsy-vm2, I missed a "/public" on the Alias line. >> Should that not work... have you ever run Docker or Vagrant before? I > > I have got Docker; don't think I have used Vagrant. Unless you are a Linux user, Vagrant is better in my opinion. You get a real VM that you can ssh into with full sudo access. With Docker, you get a container, which can only be hosted by Linux at the moment, and that means that for Mac OS/X users you will be putting it into a VM anyway. Since you are up and running, I'll put this on the back burner for now, but it is a good thing to have. >> probably can quickly set up one or the other. My thoughts are that >> once you have a working system that you can compare against, spotting >> the difference with your current setup would be much easier. And that >> could lead to updates to the documentation to help others. > > I think it would help to document what the paths represent, and for > file paths, what one would expect to find there. > > e.g. I assume PassengerAppRoot is a local path, and need to point to a > rake app, i.e. a whimsy directory containing config.ru. > > This should make it easier to check the settings are correct. The best way would be to base the settings on what is actually deployed. The instructions to produce those settings are in infrastructure-puppet, but making the generated results visible and helping you tailor them would be even better. Would you agree? - Sam Ruby
