Patrick Blesi

Would ignoring only consecutive executions work as a viable workaround for this? It may not be bullet-proof, but it seems like an improvement on the current implementation?

Regarding your initial comment, this can be accomplished by extending the runbook DSL to [include your own statements](https://github.com/braintree/runbook#adding-new-statements) Implementation for `optional_step` is essentially a mashup of the [confirm](https://github.com/braintree/runbook/blob/b572ee47fd1cc30bc328b7ad190a04f96e819a72/lib/runbook/run.rb#L80-L92) and [ruby_command](...

I like this idea, but have struggled to find a good implementation. If you can think of a good way to accomplish this, I would be interested. A couple of...

I'm happy to inform you that you've inspired me to set up a gitter chatroom: https://gitter.im/braintree/runbook?utm_source=share-link&utm_medium=link&utm_campaign=share-link Is the intent to have the process run in parallel during the life of...

Yeah, I think systemctl is still the way to go. I would recommend creating configuration files in `/etc/your_app`. These files can contain your tokens, and you can upload the files...

I agree that the alternate runs backend should not be defined before all of Runbook is loaded. Breaking out all require statements to be present in all files where they...

Yes. There are a few different ways to perform local command execution. The first is to set the target server for [SSH command](https://github.com/braintree/runbook#command) to be `localhost`/`127.0.0.1`. The second is to...