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


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Bryan Berry < >
  • To:
  • Subject: [chef] Re: Re: Re: Better workflow for actively-developed cookbooks
  • Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 23:28:49 +0200

alright, I have a pretty heterodox idea of how I would like to use librarian-chef so that a team of infrastructure devs can work in sync

I am on a team of 3 infrastructure devs, i am the (relative) expert, the other 2 guys are smart but n00bs

I want us to have one common Cheffile in our one common chef-repo

the cookbooks we develop independently each have their own git repo, unfortunately, private ones for the most part

When I create a new git repository for application-foo, I want to add the git repository link, branch name/tag/commit name, to Cheffile so that when the other guys are working, they can easily pull in the cookbooks that I am working on and vice versa

However, I dont want to do the `git add . && git commit -am 'foo' && git push origin master && librarian-chef update`  dance when I am actively working on a cookbook that is within an "active" cookbook.

I don't need librarian to resolve any dependencies for my active cookbooks, I just want a common file w/ the list of all cookbooks we are working on as a team and i want librarian to download them if they don't exist already.

Perhaps this is a perversion of all things bundler but this is what I want. It also would get much more complicated if we didn't have git repos w/ shared commit access.

Is this crazy or a good idea or both?

On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Jay Feldblum < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
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.

§