What is the crowd's opinion of Codeship?

From 3.5 billion comments

You don't need to symlink, there's a few options:

• goenv
• docker, (docker run -it --rm -v $PWD:/go/src/... golang:alpine go build/run/etc.)
• have the build toolchain in a docker image (using a CI that you can run locally, like codeship "jet" tool)

Generally, at least docker/CI approach doesn't require you to set up a GOPATH structure, and it's possible to set up vanity aliases so you can have whatever import path you like to your app.

Not sure your comment about src/ is relevant. You would only have your project under src, and for whatever dependencies you pull in, you should be using vendoring by now (dep, recently vgo). Generally it's advised to commit the vendor/ folder, but because of licensing restrictions and such, you might have to pull them on demand (vgo supposedly handles something about licenses something something, didn't read it very carefully, but if you care about which packages you include because of their licenses, you should be using vgo aparently, it's the current thing).

When I'm developing a website and I only need to see what's happening for my own needs, I run a local webserver on my machine, as /u/hashtagframework has already mentioned. For when there's significant progress on the site which the client should see, I temporarily deploy it to a DigitalOcean VPS.

Codeship is a valuable tool which does exactly what it claims to do: if you setup a GitHub repo for your project and intertwine it with your Codeship account, it takes care of continuous deployment of your newly changed files to a server of your choice.

My understanding of the legal world is limited at best, but is "internet policy" something that can provide you with a sufficient living? Are you intending to start your own practice, or is there enough demand at established firms for such expertise?

> I think I should either learn selenium so I can get back into software QA

If you want to get into test automation, you should be comfortable with the general concepts of continuous integration. You might also explore chef/ansible or other IT automation software since "can we deploy in X environment" can be, depending on the product, a major factor.

I really like - it's clean, modern and easy to read.

One problem I have is related to the white space - I think there is not enough of it.

When quickly browsing through the page I have no idea if the icons in the middle ( http://puu.sh/jSMRV/13568b02d9.jpg ) are part of the picture or belong to the right.

Same with the pricing button ( http://puu.sh/jSMW7/e62a3e5d11.png ) - is it connected to the section on the top, on the bottom or is it it's own separate section?

Because of what I mentioned the page feels a little bit too crowded.

https://codeship.com/ is a nice example of clear, well separated sections.

Good job and good luck with the service!

Agreed.

• Monkey patches are a big no-no in Ruby 2.0+. Instead, use refinements; there's a good write-up here;
• Travis is cool if you can make it work; we've had better success with CodeShip, who I now recommend enthusiastically. They're free for open-source projects;
• Working with a Gem that isn't published (via RubyGems or wherever) is a royal pain; needlessly painful experience down on its knees begging to happen. It won't have to beg long.
• Of course, a Gem that isn't visibly tested in an automated fashion (with good coverage and green bars), or isn't publicly deployed isn't going to get the use it might. Fool me once, shame on you...
• Finally, "move all your code into a ./lib directory" should probably be read as "learn and use Gem coding conventions, to make using your Gem as painless and consistent with expectations as practicable".

CI servers build your site/app/project on a continuous basis. You can run a self-hosted one like Jenkins, or use a service like Circle CI, Codeship, or Travis CI.

http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/198471/simple-explanation-of-continuous-integration

https://codeship.com/continuous-integration-essentials

> When you say the build system will run unit tests and integration tests, what does that mean exactly? How does it know what it's doing, and what even is an "integration test"? (Sorry if this is super basic).

Build systems run specific software to do this. Jenkins for example is a popular tool to do this. In terms of tests, there are different types of code levels tests:

• Unit Tests: this test specific units in your code. A unit can be a function, method or class. Unit tests don't hit real resources like databases or web requests and are fast.

• Integration Tests: Are similar to unit tests but they actually talk to external resources like databases, files on disk etc. It's more of an end to end workflow.

>What I'm getting from this is that since I'm not working on a grand project with lots of people working simultaneously (it's literally just me trying to figure out how to program my own videogames), I should just find a C++ compiler that works for me and run with that?

If it's just learning for fun then yes, but if you do decide to build somethign real that you want to show people, spending time to set up a quick build system might be worth it. There are even sites that offer build systems as a service like CodeShip

The team I work with now uses codeship to do automated deploys from a github repo.

We have two branches; dev and master branch, both set up on codeship with two different production environments. I'm not the devops guy so I'm not exactly sure how all of this works but it's pretty awesome for our workflow. When we push to our develop(or master) branch, codeship deploys it to our "next"(or production) server and everyone can see and test features as we push them to the repo.

We merge the dev branch into the master branch roughly once a week to keep everything up to date.

i use codeship to run tests and deploy my apps. it has a free plan for 100 builds p. m. in a normal month, i use 30-40 builds. it works for very small projects with not a lot of activity.