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

[Possible No-op] Adjust Procfiles for compatibility with both foreman and forego #310

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

zph
Copy link

@zph zph commented Jul 29, 2016

First off, thanks for all your work on this project :).

forego doesn't allow - in the name of processes. This allows both
foreman and forego to work with these procfiles.

Link to regex in forego looks like it should work for dashes:
https://github.com/ddollar/forego/blob/master/procfile.go#L12. But
testing on my OSX dev machine using forego 0.16.1 (latest) shows it
fail to parse any of them beyond the rails entry. I also tried
rearranging order of entries in Procfiles, with same issue.

I'll take a look in forego to see if it should be fixed upstream, but
wanted to log this here in case anyone else get stumped for a bit trying
to debug this :).


This change is Reviewable

forego doesn't allow - in the name of processes. This allows both
foreman and forego to work with these procfiles.

Link to regex in forego looks like it should work for dashes:
https://github.com/ddollar/forego/blob/master/procfile.go#L12
@justin808
Copy link
Member

@zph this should probably be fixed on forego.

@zph
Copy link
Author

zph commented Jul 29, 2016

Filed in forego: ddollar/forego#87

With forego's master copy, the existing Procfiles work if the rails entry is also wrapped in a sh -c. With master's forego, the dashes work ^_^.

Closing and will re-open if there's something actionable here.

Mahalo,
Zander

@zph zph closed this Jul 29, 2016
@zph
Copy link
Author

zph commented Jul 29, 2016

forego, by same author as foreman, broke compatibility.

It wasn't working correctly in 0.16.1, it does work correctly in master and I've asked them to cut a release from master.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants