why declare PORT? #895

Closed
mfrederickson opened this Issue Feb 28, 2014 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@mfrederickson
Member

mfrederickson commented Feb 28, 2014

@augustf

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@augustf

augustf Mar 3, 2014

Member

I'm honestly not sure. It's declared twice -- once for each instantiation of each worker. But as to the rest, it was part of the auto-generated code from the utility we used.

Member

augustf commented Mar 3, 2014

I'm honestly not sure. It's declared twice -- once for each instantiation of each worker. But as to the rest, it was part of the auto-generated code from the utility we used.

@mfrederickson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@mfrederickson

mfrederickson Mar 3, 2014

Member

Was it only foreman that uses it? If so then we probably can get rid
of it because it didn't look like rake (DJ) or clockwork used it.

Member

mfrederickson commented Mar 3, 2014

Was it only foreman that uses it? If so then we probably can get rid
of it because it didn't look like rake (DJ) or clockwork used it.

@augustf augustf added this to the 0.9.0 KiloBalrog milestone Mar 6, 2014

@augustf

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@augustf

augustf Mar 6, 2014

Member

@mikldt Do you have any idea what the port specification in this instance is doing?

Member

augustf commented Mar 6, 2014

@mikldt Do you have any idea what the port specification in this instance is doing?

@augustf augustf self-assigned this Mar 6, 2014

@bamnet

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@bamnet

bamnet Mar 6, 2014

Member

It's standard practice to supply a PORT in these init scripts, when the script is automatically generated the tool doesn't know if the process it's starting is a server which requires a port or not so it defaults to creating one.

If we're manually tuning this script it makes sense to trim it, but if we're relying on the generator to keep it up to date we'll just be introducing more deviations to track down the line.

Member

bamnet commented Mar 6, 2014

It's standard practice to supply a PORT in these init scripts, when the script is automatically generated the tool doesn't know if the process it's starting is a server which requires a port or not so it defaults to creating one.

If we're manually tuning this script it makes sense to trim it, but if we're relying on the generator to keep it up to date we'll just be introducing more deviations to track down the line.

@bamnet bamnet removed this from the 0.9.0 KiloBalrog milestone Mar 6, 2014

@augustf augustf closed this Mar 30, 2014

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment