On Thu, 17 May 2012 15:16:01 +0000, ChrisReeves wrote:

> I'm currently looking into how we handle staged deployment.
> I've searched the forums and found the following posts where there has
> been some previous discussion regarding how to handle this: 'Best way to
> migrate drivers from lab to production?'

Yeah. At least for me, nothing has really changed since those earlier
threads. There still isn't real staging support in Designer, so I'm still
maintaining two major projects (Dev and Prod) with Subversion and doing
the copy-and-paste shuffle to promote changes from Dev to Prod.

> operational environment. Because the production configuration itself is
> not actually stored in subversion (I know that sounds a little
> backward...) we store no history for the production environment

That's something I'd change, not so much for the source control, but just
for the checkin logs to be able to reference when a particular change was
promoted from your Development environment to Production.

> In looking for ways to improve how we handle staged deployment I had
> wondered whether it would be possible to merge the production workspace
> into the main project by adding the production servers to the project
> and setting the GCVs appropriately

I believe that would work, though I haven't tried it. I don't see it
really helping, at least not very much, though. You'd still have to deal
with copying your changes from your development driver to the production
driver, just now you're doing it all within one project.

> differences between development and production). Unfortunately I don't
> see how this could work because there would be no way to control which
> servers (i.e. which environments) policy changes are deployed to, unless
> I've missed something...?

Deploy would work just like it does now. What do you think wouldn't work?

> Another thing that I'd considered was creating
> a production branch and synchronising with HEAD when changes are ready
> for production (or vice versa), however Designer doesn't support
> branching and merging natively, and given that performing branching and
> merging at the file level would probably break Designer I don't really
> think this is an option either.

Yeah, I don't think that's going to work. It might be fun to try, though.

> So does anyone have any suggestions
> regarding how to improve on what we're currently doing, or know where
> those wonderful folks that gave us Designer are at with regards to
> staging (or if they're even actively working on it at all)?

As Geoff says, it looks like they're thinking that the future is
"packages". Personally, I'm not convinced that this is the best way to do
it, but I can't honestly say that I have any better ideas for them
either. I've made a few tentative attempts to start using packages, but I
haven't gotten there yet.

> Finally, on a vaguely related note, do people tend to name their
> development and production trees differently, or give them both the same
> name? Is there best practice for this?

Mine all have different names, because they're all on the network, and
you can't have two trees of the same name "see" each other or bad things

David Gersic dgersic_@_niu.edu
Knowledge Partner http://forums.novell.com

Please post questions in the forums. No support provided via email.