[chef-dev] Re: The Great Workflow RFC of 2014

[Daniel DeLeo < >]

FYI, the pull request is here: https://github.com/opscode/chef-rfc/pull/34 ;

-- 
Daniel DeLeo


On Sunday, July 27, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Adam Jacob wrote:

> I have posted and RFC that proposes two 'supported' workflows for Chef. 
> This is my attempt to take the various pain-points enumerated on the list, 
> on irc, and on twitter over the last few weeks and propose a solution. In 
> watching and listening to folks frustrations with workflow, it feels like 
> you can boil it down to a few things:
> The monolithic chef-repo works great for a lot of people.
> The "Berkshelf Way" (as opposed to Berkshelf the tool) doesn't solve a 
> problem everyone feels they have. Meanwhile, for those who feel like they 
> have that problem, they <3 it.
> We have put ourselves in an awkward spot, where much new tooling targets 
> the Berkshelf Way implicitly.
> Regardless of the workflow, everyone wants the testing tools to work.
> Some folks dislike the Berkshelf implementation
> 
> 
> This RFC proposes making two workflows "supported", which means we expect 
> them to work all the time, be supported in documentation and the community, 
> and for tool builders to target them.
> 
> 
> It also proposes adding generators and workflow commands to the 'chef' 
> command in Chef DK. This means we can make the target for documentation and 
> tool builders much smaller, as the work of noticing which workflow you 
> prefer is done by the tooling. Where there is overlap with knife, we are 
> going to subsume that functionality, and make it compatible at the options 
> level (and perhaps turn the knife plugins themselves into wrappers.)
> 
> 
> Lets fix it! Let me know what I didn't cover.
> 
> 
> I'm explicitly not detailing implementation, or even putting effort in to 
> what the future might hold for either workflow, or a third workflow. Lets 
> document and standardize what we have, make the experience better, then we 
> can talk about improvements.
> 
> 
> Adam