&gt; An additional point is - what if I have another CI gem that conflicts with capistrano-harrow but not capistrano?<p>We could find synthetic cases if we looked, Gem conflicts aren&#x27;t unheard of and everything is name spaced. Fortunately the code is all open source and if a conflict were to arise it would be easy to diagnose, and the support would be quick, since there&#x27;s a team of developers who&#x27;s <i>job</i> it is to make this work well.<p>&gt; What if capistrano-harrow introduces a security vulnerability that I&#x27;m not prepared for because I don&#x27;t pay attention to a gem I&#x27;m not using?<p>That&#x27;s something nobody can help you with, it&#x27;s a small gem, the signatures are published, Rubygems verifies the integrity, but it&#x27;s a risk for sure. Have you audited the 47 Gems that `rails` pulls in as direct and transient dependencies?<p>&gt; If capistrano is too expensive to maintain on your own, address that problem don&#x27;t drag the Rails community kicking and screaming.<p>A single prompt shown to about 1-3% of people who download Capistrano is hardly &quot;kicking and screaming&quot;, most of that is happening on Hacker News anyway, the people who&#x27;ve seen the message and signed up are too busy enjoying the platform!<p>&gt; What about soliciting help from RubyTogether?<p>I wasn&#x27;t aware RubyTogether still existed, I&#x27;d assumed it had fizzled out. Regardless we&#x27;ve tried crowdsourcing and soliciting input and sponsorship in the past, it simply didn&#x27;t work. Capistrano sits in a space where people can&#x27;t get excited about it. It&#x27;s a tricky piece of glue between other (very complex) systems.<p>Thanks for bringing RubyTogether to my attention.