Okay, thanks a lot. I'll give it a shot. :-D
Thanks,
Jamie
On 7/28/06, Andrew Goktepe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There is a loss of performance when you use antcall in large,
complex builds. It also makes target dependencies less clear. But it's the
only way I know of to call a specific target based on a value obtained at
runtime. In most other cases, it's much better to use the 'depends'
attribute of 'target' with the exact target names.
To achieve a deploy-all case, you could have a separate target (optimally
in
a separate script) that makes 'ant' calls into the main deployment script:
<target name="deploy-all">
<ant antfile="mydeploymentscript.xml" inheritAll="false">
<property name="envname" value="stage" />
</ant>
<ant antfile="mydeploymentscript.xml" inheritAll="false">
<property name="envname" value="integ" />
</ant>
... etc
</target>
-Andrew
On 7/28/06, Jamie Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the quick response. I have a couple of follow-ups.
>
> I've gotten the impression from reading other posts that <antcall> is to
> be
> avoided, so I'm wondering about its use here.
>
> The other question I have is: How would I satisfy the deploy-all use
case
> while reusing as much of the script as practical?
>
> Thanks again,
> Jamie
>
> On 7/28/06, Andrew Goktepe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Oops. s/<properties file/<property file/
> >
> > On 7/28/06, Andrew Goktepe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > We use a separate properties file for each environment, and have
> common
> > > property names. Instead of integ.transfertype, stage.transfertype,
> etc,
> > I
> > > would just have 'transfertype' and it would have different values in
> the
> > > different files. Then the Ant script has targets based on the
possible
> > > values of the property, and one generic parent target that calls
them.
> > >
> > > Example:
> > > <properties file="${envname}.properties" />
> > > <target name="deploy">
> > > <antcall target="deploy-${transfertype}" />
> > > </target>
> > > <target name="deploy-nfs"> ... </target>
> > > <target name="deploy-ssh"> ... </target>
> > >
> > > envname determines which environment-specific properties file needs
to
> > be
> > > read.
> > >
> > > This is a more scalable solution. Adding a new environment is as
> simple
> > as
> > > creating a new properties file.
> > >
> > > This assumes the build has already occurred and you can make run the
> > > deployment Ant script separately for each environment.
> > >
> > > -Andrew
> > >
> > > On 7/28/06, Jamie Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm having a problem trying to grok the "ant way" to do things (
i.e
> .,
> > > > without conditionals). I just got started with Ant a couple days
> ago,
> > so
> > > >
> > > > take that into consideration.
> > > >
> > > > I'm trying to produce a well-factored script to handle code
> deployment
> > > > to
> > > > remote servers.
> > > >
> > > > Tasks:
> > > > * deploy-integ
> > > > * deploy-stage
> > > > * deploy-prod
> > > > * deploy-all (all of the above)
> > > >
> > > > Here's the problem: Depending on the set of servers, some are
> > available
> > > > via
> > > > SSH, others are available via NFS, and I'd like the script to be
> > > > generalizable enough to specify the transfer type in the
properties
> > > > file,
> > > > along with the (potentially) varying paths among servers.
> > > >
> > > > Here's a stab at the properties file:
> > > > -----------------------------------
> > > > svn.url=http://myhost/myrepos/myproj
> > > >
> > > > integ.transfertype=nfs
> > > > stage.transfertype=ssh
> > > > prod.transfertype=ssh
> > > >
> > > > # a nfs basepath would look like //webdev/websites
> > > > # an ssh basepath would look like [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:/path/to/docroot
> > > > integ.basepath=//devserver/docroot
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] :/path/to/docroot
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/path/to/docroot
> > > >
> > > > integ.proj.wwwroot=childwelfare
> > > > stage.proj.wwwroot=childwelfare
> > > > prod.proj.wwwroot=childwelfare
> > > > ---------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Here are a couple of the salient tasks (see inline comments):
> > > >
> > > > <target name="deploy-integ">
> > > > <deploy basepath="integ.basepath" proj.wwwroot="
> > > > integ.proj.wwwroot"
> > > > transfertype="integ.transfertype" />
> > > > </target>
> > > >
> > > > <macrodef name="deploy">
> > > > <attribute name="args" />
> > > > <attribute name="basepath" />
> > > > <attribute name="proj.wwwroot" />
> > > > <attribute name="transfertype" />
> > > > <!-- I'd like to do it the "right way, and avoid "if", but
> > don't
> > > > know how -->
> > > > <!-- Not to mention that I can't even put the "if" in
> macrodef,
> > > > so
> > > > it doesn't work anyway -->
> > > > <if>
> > > > <equals arg1="@{transfertype}" arg2="ssh" />
> > > > <then>
> > > > <property name="@{args}" value="-e ssh -Cacvz @{
> > > > local.buildDir}/* @{basepath}/@{proj.wwwroot}" />
> > > > </then>
> > > > <else>
> > > > <property name="@{args}" value="-av @{
local.buildDir
> }/
> > > > @{basepath}/@{proj.wwwroot}/" />
> > > > </else>
> > > > </if>
> > > > <echo message="rsync ${args}" />
> > > > <exec executable="rsync">
> > > > <arg line="${args}" />
> > > > </exec>
> > > > </macrodef>
> > > >
> > > > What's the right approach?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Jamie
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
