staticfile to be tested before nodejs/ruby buildpacks

[drnic]

Many staticfile apps are using nodejs or ruby toolchains to construct their assets. This can trick the nodejs_buildpack or ruby_buildpack to try to deploy the app. I suggest placing staticfile_buildpack earlier in the list.

[cfdreddbot]

Hey drnic!

Thanks for submitting this pull request! I'm here to inform the recipients of the pull request that you've already signed the CLA.

[cf-gitbot]

We have created an issue in Pivotal Tracker to manage this. You can view the current status of your issue at: https://www.pivotaltracker.com/story/show/94594952.

[flavorjones]

This seems reasonable, as the staticfile-buildpack will only be activated by the presence of a Staticfile file. No objections.

[dieucao]

@drnic @flavorjones
Thoughts on moving this to after the java buildpack?
In the auto detect order I think it makes sense to auto detect java first if that doesn't cause any conflicts.

[drnic]

Why does it make sense?

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:52 AM, dieucao notifications@github.com
wrote:

@drnic @flavorjones
Thoughts on moving this to after the java buildpack?

In the auto detect order I think it makes sense to auto detect java first if that doesn't cause any conflicts.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#680 (comment)

[dieucao]

@drnic For auto detect, my feeling is that since the highest percentage of apps are java apps on first push it would be desirable to try the java buildpack first. Does that sound reasonable?

[drnic]

Are there any build systems for static apps that are written in Java? That is, if you used a Java app or jar to create your html/CSS/JavaScript then would the Java build pack accidentally think you're running a Java app? Where as you know it's a staticfile app because of Staticfile?

Can you point me to docs on how Java bin/detect behaves?

I know how staticfile build pack behaves and it would never accidentally deploy a Java app.

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 2:33 AM, dieucao notifications@github.com wrote:

@drnic For auto detect, my feeling is that since the highest percentage of apps are java apps on first push it would be desirable to try the java buildpack first. Does that sound reasonable?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#680 (comment)

[dieucao]

@drnic
On the java-buildpack README if you click into each of the standard containers and standard frameworks you can see how they each do detection.

@nebhale @cgfrost
Do you have any concerns about staticfile-buildpack being first in the autodetect order?

[nebhale]

@dieucao @drnic Since Java applications are built locally and pushed in their "runnable" form, placing the staticfile_buildpack ahead of the Java buildpack should be safe. It's possible that someone could place a Staticfile in the root of their Java application, but I'd consider that an aberration that should be handled by specifying the Java buildpack.

[dieucao]

This was merged and should be available in the next cf-release.
Not sure why it doesn't show up here as merged but the commit is here:
ff7a305