Thanks Brian,

It looks like it will manage the git repositories for me. It might be a
good idea, but I think I'll keep it it "custom" build. I (wishful
thinking) don't use Apache, etc.

On 10/07/10 13:56, Brian Bouterse wrote:
> Maybe not an exact answer to your question, but we do something kind of
> similar to what you are describing.  Basically, we have app authors
> (both frontend and backend) work with their app in their own repo and
> publish them into this repository <https://apps.opus.ncsu.edu/>.  Then
> we use Opus <http://github.com/bmbouter/opus> to deploy them onto our
> servers since it is connected to the app repository where their apps are
> published Opus provides a self service deployment interface.  You can
> even test your deployments on our sandbox servers
> <https://sandbox.opus.ncsu.edu/>.
> 
> Brian
> 
> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 8:25 AM, Piotr Zalewa <zal...@gmail.com
> <mailto:zal...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>      Hi,
> 
>     I'm working on defining the structure of an application
>     It will have quite a few apps, with few of them opensourced.
> 
>     I was thinking how to make it easier for people involved into the
>     project.
>     In essence front-end developer should work on one repository only -
>     that's also goes quite nicely with app portability and would also help
>     if an idea about whitelabelling the project could come to someone's
>     mind.
>     Other apps will be installed via pip under the virtual environment and
>     will be a separate repositories in git.
>     Back-end devs then will work each one on the application back-end and on
>     the front-end application, to provide some changes to the functionality.
> 
>     Basically:
>     project - one repository
>     front-end app - one repository
>     apps - a repository for each one.
> 
>     I'd like to implement a slightly modified V.Dressen's model of the
>     workflow - in draft explained here:
>     https://wiki.mozilla.org/Labs/Jetpack/FlightDeck/Code_Workflow on each
>     of the repositories
> 
>     Do you think it's best structure?
>     And, quite important, will it not look like a mess for an "average"
>     developer?
> 
>     Piotr
> 
>     --
>     blog  http://piotr.zalewa.info
>     jobs  http://builder.mozillalabs.com, http://jsfiddle.net
>     twit  http://twitter.com/zalun
> 
> 
>     --
>     You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>     Groups "Django users" group.
>     To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com
>     <mailto:django-users@googlegroups.com>.
>     To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>     django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
>     <mailto:django-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
>     For more options, visit this group at
>     http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Brian Bouterse
> ITng Services
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Django users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-us...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.


-- 
blog  http://piotr.zalewa.info
jobs  http://webdev.zalewa.info
twit  http://twitter.com/zalun
face  http://facebook.com/zaloon

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-us...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.

Reply via email to