I’m trying to get my head around the correct way to use channels and environments together in my project. The structure of the system is that there are two websites that are independently deployed, but built from the same source. Along with the websites are a number of web services that are deployed at the same time. They both have the same lifecycle in terms of dev/test/prod.
The deployment process for both environments is largely the same, but the servers they deploy to are different, as the number of instances needed for each web service varies between the sites. Right now, I have them built as two separate projects, using different environments for each deployment (e.g., dev-siteA, dev-siteB, test-siteA, test-siteB, etc). This seems like a good use case for Channels, but I don’t know if I can limit which servers get deployed via using channels. I would love to have a single project and a single set of environments. Is this something I could use Channels for?
Thanks for getting in touch. Unfortunately this isn’t quite the right fit for channels as you found out. But I think it will be a good fit for some of the upcoming multi-tenancy support we’re adding to Octopus in 3.4. I’ll make sure we consider the scenario you described when we plan the details of the feature.
Sorry to hijack this thread, but is multi-tenancy support now coming in v3.4? Previous announcements and your roadmap (https://octopus.com/company/roadmap) suggested it would be in v3.3.
That’s right - we did some planning and prototyping for 3.3 Multi-tenancy, but after feedback on the blog from our RFC we realised the design we had in mind wasn’t quite right, so we’re making some changes. We have other features ready and waiting to be released, so rather than wait for them to ship at the same time as multi-tenancy, we decided to try and ship them now. Multi-tenancy is the number one priority on our list once these small changes in 3.3 are out of the way.