Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

revel package: please support tar.{gz,bz2} #67

Closed
stapelberg opened this issue Jan 23, 2013 · 2 comments
Closed

revel package: please support tar.{gz,bz2} #67

stapelberg opened this issue Jan 23, 2013 · 2 comments

Comments

@stapelberg
Copy link

Using chmod every time after unpacking the updated zip file is annoying. By using a decent file format like tar.gz or tar.bz2, that would not be necessary.

@robfig
Copy link
Contributor

robfig commented Jan 23, 2013

Good point -- I used zip because it is "natively" supported on windows (and I recall the API to write zip files is more pleasant). Also, doing bash run.sh instead of ./run.sh doesn't seem too bad.

On the other hand, any Windows developers using go probably have some kind of MinGW / Cygwin situation, which would provide them with tar as well.

Sounds like a good change to make.

@stapelberg
Copy link
Author

Re: using bash run.sh:

I am deploying all my stuff using systemd, where you specify an absolute path to the binary you want to run. In my case that is /opt/piksku/run.sh, which is much clearer than /usr/bin/bash /opt/piksku/run.sh.

Another thing I’ve noticed is that the timestamps of the files are all wrong (e.g. "-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 482 1985-08-14 00:00 app.conf"). Is that an oversight or another implication of using zip files? It might be bad for the Last-Modified HTTP mechanism, e.g. when you edit a file on the production server (it’s a no-no, but people probably still occasionally do it), then later edit it locally with different changes and deploy a new package. The client would not get the new file in that situation.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants