Do you have a local test environment?

[mneylon]

Just out of curiousity more than anything else...

I was just wondering if any of you had a local testing setup before you deployed

 

[louie]

Yes on my own computer, but due to different setup on the server I still prefer to check it out live.

 

[daviddoran]

Yes, productivity is nothing without a local environment. Mine is WinXP + PHP4.3 + Apache1.3 + Mysql4.19

Though if I need to work off a live server my editor will FTP it when I hit save which saves alot of extra FTP-ing.

 

[mneylon]

Surely there are a lot of issues with testing on windows before deploying to linux?

 

[daviddoran]

Not really, as long as you are aware of the few differences such as in paths and the PHP/MySQL versions are compatible then there aren't really many things that go wrong. More often the problem is the deployment server has something like mod_rewrite missing, which isn't a platform problem.

I use my website to test my scripts on Linux anyway.

 

[mneylon]

Well you can't do mod_rewrite on windows and the write permissions would be quite different as well.....

 

[daviddoran]

You must be thinking of IIS Server on Windows. I am using Apache, the same Apache that almost all Linux servers use so I have mod_rewrite on and working.
As for the write permissions that can be different.

 

[enzo]

Apache 2.2 on the PC/1.3 on the Laptop both running XP. Couldn't live without it.

 

[daviddoran]

I have Grub installed with Ubuntu on a partition which I can boot into at startup but I haven't switched over to using it as my primary because my wireless card doesn't work.
Having a local setup is great because if you want to test something you just throw it into a PHP file, run it and delete it.

 

[Deleted member 444]

Yeah I wouldn't be without a local apache/php/mysql setup.

 

[ziycon]

Don't think i'd be where i am now without a local environment!

Apache 2.2.2, MySQL 5.0.22, PHP 5.1.4 all on XP Pro.

 

[Arch-Stanton]

A little SME server in the corner, running a public test server allows you to nearly complete the site with the client before you publish to the production enviornment.

.

 

[ButtermilkJack]

I just finished installing MySQL 5.0.27 and PHP 5.2 on my Mac today, which is running Apache 1.3.2 (I think?).

I'm just using it purely for educational purposes though. I'm trying to learn some PHP.

 

[daviddoran]

That's the beauty of it - no restriction on installing and no restrictions to test out your stuff.

 

[Sparks]

Yes, LAMP here, LAMP there, same versions across the board. Can't debug properly otherwise. (And testing with both Firefox and IE on linux and win32 platforms)

Mind you, I tend to be doing custom work a bit, rather than bolting sites together, so slightly different needs.

 

[enzo]

And testing with both Firefox and IE on linux and win32 platforms

Speaking of which have we had a thread on what browsers people test in/support?

 

[victor]

Anyone using or have a use for CVS in their environment or use development sub-domains on a live server?

Find using a sub-domain on the live server gives good flexibility with making sure it works on the live server without affecting the actual live public site. When done the site is copied to the root directory.

Office machine on XP Pro
- Apache 1.3.33, PHP 4.3.10, MySQL 4.1.8 (DBTools DB Manager for admin), Zend bits and pieces (Optimiser, Debugger & Platform)
- IIS 5.1, .NET 2.0, MSSQL Server 2005 (from Visual Web Developer)

Laptop on XP Pro
- updating to Apache 2.2.3, PHP 5.2.0, MySQL 5.0.27 (DBTools DB Manager for admin), Zend bits and pieces (Optimiser, Debugger & Platform - going to try Framework)


& a handy 5GB USB drive that I probably rely on more than I should.

 

[enzo]

Anyone using or have a use for CVS in their environment or use development sub-domains on a live server?

Wouldn't know anything about CVS, i've only used it to download/upload some files on Mozilla. I hate command lines, I always get the feeling i'm going to totally **** up the computer or something, so I use turtle cvs, easy for dummies.

 

[victor]

Would be interested to hear opinions / preferences on cvs installs in their devlopment environments - only used MS Source Safe

 

[Sparks]

Used CVS before, and Bitkeeper, and now using Subversion. I prefer subversion of all of them. CVS won't let you rename files sanely, and while bitkeeper has excellent design points, it's been dragged along the line between open and closed source very messily. Subversion, you just use and don't worry about EULAs and the like as it's GPL. Plus, it's well supported on Win32 and *nix platforms. It's also got a bloody useful tag/branch approach.