binarycloud-dev

[binarycloud-dev] make'd site file structure

[Jason H. <jc...@ey...>]

this is my understanding of how it will work.. correct me if i'm wrong.

(example)

$ cd /usr/local/binarycloud
$ make site_name
(it does it's thing)
$ cd build/site_name/en
$ ls
binarycloud  ext  htdocs  user



so, if this right, in theory, it would then be possible to remove the
binarycloud root dir (/usr/local/binarycloud) if so desired because all
of the newly make'd site is completely self sufficient/stand-alone.


jason

RE: [binarycloud-dev] make'd site file structure

[Andreas A. (Thyrell) <a.a...@th...>]

Hi Jason,

>this is my understanding of how it will work.. correct me if i'm >wrong.

> $ cd /usr/local/binarycloud
> $ make site_name
> (it does it's thing)
> $ cd build/site_name/en
> $ ls
> binarycloud  ext  htdocs  user

correct.


> so, if this right, in theory, it would then be possible to
> remove the binarycloud root dir (/usr/local/binarycloud)
> if so desired because all of the newly make'd site is
> completely self sufficient/stand-alone.

yeah, groovy - isn't it.

Actually, I think it's not quite a good idea to keep bc in
/usr/local/binarycloud but in /home/you/projects/yourproject/binarycloud or
something like that. So you don't have troubel with root rights etc.

Andi

RE: [binarycloud-dev] make'd site file structure

[kr <kr...@pa...>]

Andreas Aderhold (Thyrell) writes:
 > Actually, I think it's not quite a good idea to keep bc in
 > /usr/local/binarycloud but in /home/you/projects/yourproject/binarycloud or
 > something like that. So you don't have troubel with root rights etc.

i suppose it depends on what type of an installation it is.  if you
are a hobbyist end user, then it is better to not deal with root
access.

however, if a company makes an installation, it should not go into a
/home directory, and /usr/local/binarycloud makes more sense.

i hope the installation procedure won't close off either option.

-- 
Regards,
Markus Krummenacker

Re: [binarycloud-dev] make'd site file structure

[Alex B. <en...@tu...>]

> i suppose it depends on what type of an installation it is.  if you
> are a hobbyist end user, then it is better to not deal with root
> access.

To do any serious installation with a vhost (assuming your apache install is
correct) you will need root access to at least an accessible httpd.conf.

You will be able set up binarycloud in 'shared' environments - but we'll
have to explicitly support that in the make system.

> however, if a company makes an installation, it should not go into a
> /home directory, and /usr/local/binarycloud makes more sense.

Correct, for production installs.

> i hope the installation procedure won't close off either option.

No, I'm not in the business of mandating things like that.

_a

RE: [binarycloud-dev] make'd site file structure

[Andreas A. (Thyrell) <a.a...@th...>]

Hi Markus,

> however, if a company makes an installation, it should not
> go into a /home directory, and /usr/local/binarycloud makes
> more sense.

> i hope the installation procedure won't close off either option.

I don't think so. A installation procedure will not force a installation
root.

Andi

Re: [binarycloud-dev] make'd site file structure

[Alex B. <en...@tu...>]

> Hi Jason,
> 
>> this is my understanding of how it will work.. correct me if i'm >wrong.
> 
>> $ cd /usr/local/binarycloud
>> $ make site_name
>> (it does it's thing)
>> $ cd build/site_name/en
>> $ ls
>> binarycloud  ext  htdocs  user
> 
> correct.
> 
> 
>> so, if this right, in theory, it would then be possible to
>> remove the binarycloud root dir (/usr/local/binarycloud)
>> if so desired because all of the newly make'd site is
>> completely self sufficient/stand-alone.
> 
> yeah, groovy - isn't it.
> 
> Actually, I think it's not quite a good idea to keep bc in
> /usr/local/binarycloud but in /home/you/projects/yourproject/binarycloud or
> something like that. So you don't have troubel with root rights etc.

That is exactly what I do.

I would expect that usr/local/binarycloud/ would be a production build
install dir only.

home/user/r2/ is the good place to do it :)

_a

RE: [binarycloud-dev] make'd site file structure

[Andreas A. (Thyrell) <a.a...@th...>]

Hi Alex,

>> Actually, I think it's not quite a good idea to keep bc in
>> /usr/local/binarycloud but in
>> /home/you/projects/yourproject/binarycloud or
>> something like that. So you don't have troubel with root rights

> That is exactly what I do.

> I would expect that usr/local/binarycloud/ would be a production > build
install dir only.

Yupp, only the build tree

> home/user/r2/ is the good place to do it :)

Hehe :-)

Andi

Re: [binarycloud-dev] make'd site file structure

[Alex B. <en...@tu...>]

> this is my understanding of how it will work.. correct me if i'm wrong.
> 
> (example)
> 
> $ cd /usr/local/binarycloud
close: $ cd /usr/local/binarycloud/user/

> $ make site_name
> (it does it's thing)
> $ cd build/site_name/en
> $ ls
> binarycloud  ext  htdocs  user

yes.


> so, if this right, in theory, it would then be possible to remove the
> binarycloud root dir (/usr/local/binarycloud) if so desired because all
> of the newly make'd site is completely self sufficient/stand-alone.

Yes.

Think of it as:

"source tree" (the place where you write your code)
make -> "binary" which is in our case a collection of files which are
specifically configured to work with that language context, etc.


> jason

:)

_a

Re: [binarycloud-dev] make'd site file structure

[Jason H. <jc...@ey...>]

Ok, a few more questions come to mind.

If I write my core BEFORE I make, this implies that parts of the "source
tree" need to be accessible by the webserver.  (bindly coding PHP is no
fun)

When you say "write my code", I assume you mean writing modules.  For
creating the templates, page definitions, web site directory structure,
etc requires an existing document root.  It makes sense to me that I can
simply 'make site_name', then go to my newly make'd site tree, and begin
coding.

Where would my virtual host document point?
	- bc/build/en/site_name
	- /var/www/html/site_name (symlink to bc/build/en/site_name)
	- whatever

ok, that's all i can muster for now..
jason







Alex Black wrote:
> Think of it as:
> 
> "source tree" (the place where you write your code)
> make -> "binary" which is in our case a collection of files which are
> specifically configured to work with that language context, etc.

Re: [binarycloud-dev] make'd site file structure

[Alex B. <en...@tu...>]

> 
> Ok, a few more questions come to mind.
> 
> If I write my core BEFORE I make, this implies that parts of the "source
> tree" need to be accessible by the webserver.  (bindly coding PHP is no
> fun)

No, you run make for changes.
So, modify a file, run make, test.
Make will be quick because it compares fie modification dates.

> When you say "write my code", I assume you mean writing modules.  For
> creating the templates, page definitions, web site directory structure,
> etc requires an existing document root.  It makes sense to me that I can
> simply 'make site_name', then go to my newly make'd site tree, and begin
> coding.

You don't write code in your build directory, you write it in your source
tree. So for example, you'd write some code in
r2/binarycloud/user/site_name/mod/ModuleName.php, and run make.

the webserver would "see" r2/binarycloud/build/en/htdocs/* in a development
environment, probably usr/local/apache/htdocs/en/ in a production
environment.

> Where would my virtual host document point?
> - bc/build/en/site_name
> - /var/www/html/site_name (symlink to bc/build/en/site_name)
> - whatever

Yes.

_a


> ok, that's all i can muster for now..
> jason
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alex Black wrote:
>> Think of it as:
>> 
>> "source tree" (the place where you write your code)
>> make -> "binary" which is in our case a collection of files which are
>> specifically configured to work with that language context, etc.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> binarycloud-dev mailing list
> bin...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/binarycloud-dev
>