[chef] Re: Re: Better workflow for actively-developed cookbooks


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Jay Feldblum < >
  • To:
  • Subject: [chef] Re: Re: Better workflow for actively-developed cookbooks
  • Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 17:01:16 -0400

Wes,

It's a good question.

Right now, the reason is that the Knife integration is a little too simplistic for its ambitions.

The Knife integration does not manipulate the cookbook_path. Instead, you do that yourself. The Knife integration just tells you the path to use when set the cookbook_path.

There are certainly better ways out there to do it, ways which might address what you are asking about, and which I may explore in the future.

Cheers,
Jay

On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Wes Morgan < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
Thanks for your clarifications. I understand most of it, and I'm not actually asking for those things to be changed. I don't think. :)

What I really need, and what I should have said first:

With bundler, when I specify a :path => option, it just uses the code in that path directly. Is there a reason Librarian-Chef can't do that and instead copies it into the cookbooks dir? If there were just the one directory for the path'd cookbook, that would pretty much solve my problem. It sounded like the L-C knife integration could manipulate knife's cookbook path, so I was surprised it didn't do that and just point it at the directory specified in the :path => option.

Wes




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

§