We have a large centralized Rails app, and are beginning to hire outside developers to build small apps on top of our API. We'll be hosting those apps on a VPS running Ubuntu, and I'm wondering what's the best way to manage deploy permissions. We'd like to allow developers to deploy to our staging server, but not to have access to any of the other apps that live there.
Is a chroot jail pretty much our only option? In theory, I'd prefer that folks couldn't even log in to the server--just deploy to it.
I know something like limiting users to SFTP could work, but Capistrano 3 doesn't seem play nice with SFTP.
What do other folks do in this situation? Is it pretty non-standard to grant deploy access to a staging server in this case? Any suggestions?
It's a staging server… does it really matter if they have access? But assuming it does I would setup a single "deploy server" that was responsible for deploying. Then wire up a front end to it that your developers can initiate deploys based on permissions you've setup.
I don't have a concrete example, but I'm thinking similar to the "deploy on continuous integration test success" features you see and the "deploy from your Slack chatroom" stuff.
Same idea.
Related
I have developed an application with Laravel5.1. Now I need hosting suggestion for deploying my application. I know it's a silly question but I want a reliable answer. Before buying a hosting I want to know which hosting service will provide proper environment to run a laravel5.1 application.
Php version required >= 5.5.9
This is such a hard question to answer as it all depends on what you're after.
Some questions to consider:
Do you want to set the server up yourself?
If this is the case then any unmanaged provider will do the trick, you'll just need to set it all up; LAMP, Git, Composer etc.
Do you want to manage the server itself but you aren't sure how to set it up?
Digital Ocean (and other providers I'm sure) offer one-click apps where you can deploy whatever you want. For Laravel you would probably want to pick the LAMP app install. These deploy all the packages you will require and set them up for you so that you don't need to - the rest of the server management would be up to you from there.
Do you want to use Managed Hosting where they do it all for you?
OVH have been pretty good for me in the past, I've never used their managed option, although I know they have it - and I've had great service from them too.
If you're still not sure then I would suggest looking for a provider that provides servers that come with a LAMP stack (as this covers everything you need for Laravel) or one that supports PHP applications - if you're not sure then just contact the company and ask. Or find someone (a friend or a professional) who can help you get started online.
One suggestion because you are using Laravel is to look at https://forge.laravel.com/ where you can handle servers that runs in Digital Ocean and other providers.
Fits perfectly for Laravel.
I was wondering if there was around a hosting as those that have existed for years for PHP that would give the opportunity to publish many Ruby and Rails applications and not as Heroku that forces a single application for dyno.
In classical hosting PHP I can create a folder, upload some files in php and navigate them through links.
You can something like that on some Web hosting?
For small projects, Heroku is really the best deal. Their free tier does everything you'd need for something that's occasionally used and doesn't have a lot of scaling issues. You are restricted to one application per "dyno", per account.
For anything more demanding it's not hard to set up a hosting environment on a VPS provider. Although it takes some additional knowledge, you'll be able to set up and configure a web server using a tool like Passenger and manage your own instances. For $10/mo. you can have a very capable server instance that will handle way more than a $7/mo. dyno can manage. Even the $5/mo. server from a provider like Digital Ocean is a fantastic deal.
PHP's fire and forget method of hosting is convenient, but it's actually a lot more work in the long haul compared to an efficient workflow based around Rails and Passenger.
For example, using Capistrano and a version control system like Git you can make changes, test locally, package up into a commit and deploy on your server within minutes. It's basically effortless once you get it working.
For small production projects, I use webfaction, it's easier to push to production than to configure a complete VPS as it's more like a managed hosting (with all the tools and documentation you need for rails) .
I use mina for deployment and Git for version control.
To complete #Tadman answer you can check OpenShift if you want a more Heroku like alternative.
When I started using Rails I was also tempted to compare and seek for a 'php-hosting' like solution. But it's just a different approach.
To answer your question more precisely, you don't drop files in a folder and navigate with links in a classic rails project. You have to understand the concept of MVC, routing ...
I suggest that you give the rails-tutorial a try, it is a good starting point for understanding the whole rails ecosystem.
You can try Ruby hosting on Jelastic PaaS with automated deployment to containers and scaling, as well as pay-per-use pricing model that makes it not so pricy.
There are pre-configured Apache and NGINX containers for running Ruby application, supported different Ruby versions, built-in Ruby on Rails framework, Passenger, Puma, Unicorn, Bundler dependency manager etc.
When deploying a Ruby application, only a single context (ROOT) can be used. However, you can switch between three deployment types: deployment, production and test.
More details are described here https://jelastic.com/blog/ruby-paas-hosting/
You can start with a free trial and test how it suits your project before investing any budget. This Ruby PaaS is available on different local service providers https://jelastic.cloud/
I'm proposing a SaaS solution to a prospective client to avoid the need for local installation and upgrades. The client uploads their input data as needed and downloads the outputs, so data backup and maintenance is not an issue, but continuity of the online software service is a concern for them.
Code escrow would appear to be overkill here and probably of little value. I was wondering is there an option along the lines of providing a snapshot image of a cloud server that includes a working version of the app, and for that to be in the client's possession for use in an emergency where they can no longer access the software.
This would need to be as close to a point and click solution as possible - say a one page document with a few steps that a non web savvy IT person can follow - for starting up the backup server image and being able to use the app. If I were to create a private AWS EBS snapshot / AMI that includes a working version of the application, and they created an AWS account for themselves, might they be able to kick that off easily enough?
Update:the app is on heroku at the moment so hopefully it'd be pretty straightforward to get it running in amazon EC2.
Host their app at any major PAAS providers, such as EngineYard or Heroku. Check their code into a private Github repository that you can assign them as the owner. That way they have access to the source code and can create a new instance quickly using the repository as the source.
I don't see the need to create an entire service mirror for a Rails app, unless there are specific configuration needs that can't be contained in the project or handled through capistrano.
I am currently developing an MVC app using asp.net. My final aim is to deploy the saas on Azure.
But would it be feasible to do it at a later stage or should i incorporate it into my development?
When it comes to use Azure authentication etc i will require that due to the app being multi tenancy.
Just wanted to know peoples thoughts on this?
Cheers
It would be better if you can provide more information. Do you want to know if you ignore Azure at the moment, how much effort you need to take if you decide to deploy the application to Azure? In general it would not take too much effort, unless you want to use Azure services, such as storage, ACS, and so on. Deploying an ASP.NET application to Azure web site is just like deploy to a remote IIS. Deploy to web role requires you to create an additional cloud service project. Deploy to virtual machine usually does not require any modifications to the project, but requires you to setup all the environment.
In addition, please note there’re still some difference between Azure and local environment. For example, we usually use Azure SQL Service instead of connecting to the local SQL server.
Best Regards,
Ming Xu.
I'm doing something similar, but without developing on Azure right now. I have prepared for it though by making sure I use interfaces as much as possible. For instance, I don't write to a file system using File and Directory, but to interfaces IFile and IDirectory.
If you can avoid assuming anything based on your current localised, Windows Server environment then you can at least write implementations to satisfy requirements that do work in Azure. I'm planning to deploy to Azure and local Web servers and use Dependency Injection to satisfy the concrete implementation of the interfaces. I could just as easily use the same codebase entirely and have it detect the environment before injecting the implementations.
I'm building a Rails 3 application that I plan on provided as a subscription-based SaaS (Software as a Service) product. Basically, I want users to be able to hit my "Sign up" page, create a new account, and immediately start using the software.
A good example of what I'm trying to accomplish is: http://www.getharvest.com/
Here's what I need to happen when someone signs up:
A MySQL database for them is generated on the db server
A sub-domain is created (e.g., companyx.awesomeapp.com)
The Rails app should know the appropriate database to connect to based on the sub-domain
Are there any good guides out there for setting this stuff up? Even better, are there services that you can purchase to automate this type of thing? Ideally, I'd like to just worry about writing my Rails app and then be able to plop it atop some awesome Rails SaaS infrastructure.
(Also, I need a way to bill them monthly, but I think that's a separate question/problem.)
Heroku would let you get up and running quickly. You can manage the infrastructure using the heroku gem. Here is the documentation to the client which should allow you to manage heroku applications remotely. Using heroku would allow you to scale applications on an individual level and let you focus on the code of the application instead of the hardware.