[chef] Re: Meet test-kitchen

[Joshua Timberman < >]

Ohai,

Thanks for opening the tickets, it's important to get those things tracked so 
folks can submit feedback, or contribute.

On Aug 23, 2012, at 12:46 AM, Torben Knerr 
<
 >
 wrote:

> Yes, for non-cookbook projects using "integration_test" that makes sense.
> 
> For cookbook projects using "cookbook" the rvm option still does not
> (generally) make sense to me. Okay, if I know I have a basebox with
> rvm and some Rubies installed, then it would be fair to state that you
> want to test against several different rubies. Yes, but this makes
> some heavy assumptions about rvm and rubies being installed on the
> basebox, so I would rather see "runtimes" as an option within
> "platform", but not within "cookbooks", e.g.
> 
> """
> platform :centos do
>  version "5.8" do
>    box "opscode-centos-5.8"
>    box_url 
> "https://opscode-vm.s3.amazonaws.com/vagrant/boxes/opscode-centos-5.8.box";
>    runtimes ['1.9.2', '1.9.3']
>  end
> end
> """
> 
> The default of [] would mean that the system ruby that is installed
> along with Chef of basebox is used. If "runtimes" is specified it
> would explicitly mean rvm rubies.
> 
> For sure, you could then also exclude specific runtimes:
> 
> """
> cookbook "apache2" do
>  configuration "default"
>  exclude :platform => 'centos', :runtimes => ['1.9.2']
>  run_list_extras ['apache2_test::setup']
> end
> """
> 
> Does that make sense?
> 
> 
> Finally, this part of the current "cookbook" / "runtimes"
> documentation confuses me most: "The default for cookbook projects is
> [], which effectively disables spec/feature tests"
> 
> Why should spec/feature tests be disabled in this case?

You also posted this to the appropriate tickets, yes? I just want to make 
sure I interpreted the comments correctly.

Thanks!