[chef] Re: Re: Re: Re: Centralized cookbook-library repos vs distributed cookbook repos

[Hedge Hog < >]

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Bryan McLellan 
<
 >
 wrote:
> As Josh brings up, it takes a lot of work to make a cookbook abstract
> enough that it could work for everyone. Usually when I write cookbooks
> in-house, I end up somewhere in between something that other people
> could use and something that is full of imperfections or hacks for my
> infrastructure. Ultimately it's easier to make something that
> functions enough to be a good example or start for others than a drop
> in functioning cookbook.

OK I seem to have had the idea of several recipes in one cookbook
while perhaps the typical approach is one recipe per cookbook.

>
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:57 AM, Hedge Hog 
> <
 >
>  wrote:
>> Thanks, I had.  I think Git does offer something powerful, rapid bug
>> fix distribution is one.
>
> There's no doubt that git has superb magic powers, and that leveraging
> github makes bringing forks home and sharing code easier. There are
> limitations to the accessibility to cookbooks via github that are
> addressable in the Cookbooks site such as tags, notifications of
> updates, and simpler integration between the chef-server and the
> cookbook.
>
> In either case, the missing key is people or organizations to take
> ownership of cookbooks and file tickets to get them included in the
> opscode github cookbooks repository or uploading them to the cookbooks
> site. There's some big shoes to be filled there by someone
> enterprising enough to lead.

Or lots of people with small shoes, sharing in a common style :)

>
> Bryan
>



-- 
πόλλ' οἶδ ἀλώπηξ, ἀλλ' ἐχῖνος ἓν μέγα
[The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.]
  Archilochus, Greek poet (c. 680 BC – c. 645 BC)
http://wiki.hedgehogshiatus.com