19 points | by speckx 3 hours ago
6 comments
> It lets you define deploy scripts and other remote tasks
Ok.
> run them from your terminal and watch every step as it happens
> and watch every step as it happens
Yes, this is usually how scripts work.
> When everything finishes, you get a summary table with timing for each step.
> If a task fails, its output is shown and execution stops right there so you can investigate.
Yes, I write my larger scripts to do such things...
> Writing plain bash instead of Blade
Yes, probably a good idea.
Call me crazy (you're crazy!) but I'm not seeing the point.
This is where I stopped reading:
> Scotty was built with the help of AI
So it sounds like my heuristic worked. =)
The most obvious question, I know, but... why not just use plain Bash?
Or something like Ansible? Which is battle tested, provides idempotency for most things, and has a large library of tasks it knows how to do.
Scotty doesn't know...
It's in the title: "a beautiful"
It looks nicer.
I use good old GNU Make.
> It lets you define deploy scripts and other remote tasks
Ok.
> run them from your terminal and watch every step as it happens
> and watch every step as it happens
Yes, this is usually how scripts work.
> When everything finishes, you get a summary table with timing for each step.
> If a task fails, its output is shown and execution stops right there so you can investigate.
Yes, I write my larger scripts to do such things...
> Writing plain bash instead of Blade
Yes, probably a good idea.
Call me crazy (you're crazy!) but I'm not seeing the point.
This is where I stopped reading:
> Scotty was built with the help of AI
So it sounds like my heuristic worked. =)
The most obvious question, I know, but... why not just use plain Bash?
Or something like Ansible? Which is battle tested, provides idempotency for most things, and has a large library of tasks it knows how to do.
Scotty doesn't know...
It's in the title: "a beautiful"
It looks nicer.
I use good old GNU Make.