[chef] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Force recipe to run at the end

[AJ Christensen < >]

For structured code like this (requires, includes, extends.. code that
spreads multiple files..) I'd suggest moving it out to a Ruby Gem and
using the chef_gem installation method / compile time access.

As Jay mentioned, the libraries are shipped from the server and
evaluated as they are received (IIRC) so you can have potential
ordering issues there when requiring a file that doesn't exist, or
relying on a file to be autoloaded, etc.

Here's an additional example:

http://rubygems.org/gems/flock_of_chefs
https://github.com/chrisroberts/flock_of_chefs/
https://github.com/chrisroberts/cookbook-flock_of_chefs/blob/master/recipes/default.rb

Cheers,

--AJ

On 2 October 2012 14:35, Julien Vehent 
<
 >
 wrote:
> On 2012-09-26 03:15, Phil Dibowitz wrote:
>>
>> On 09/25/2012 07:02 PM, Julien Vehent wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks. I updated the cookbook:
>>> http://community.opscode.com/cookbooks/afw
>>> One thing that I'm not 100% comfortable with (despite the great help on
>>> #chef)
>>> is how to export a single function from a given module to other
>>> cookbooks. In
>>> this case, I have AFW.create_rule() that simply calls the internal
>>> function
>>> AFWCore.process_rule(). I'm guessing this could be done better, but being
>>> primarily a sysadmin/security and not really a rubyist, I'm not sure how.
>>
>>
>> That's totally fine. I only did a quick scan of the code, but if I read it
>> correctly, create_rule() is just a wrapper for some sanity checking and
>> then
>> adding the rule to the node object, right?
>>
>> That's completely reasonable. That all then gets added a compile time, and
>> at
>> runtime when your template is processed all the data is there.
>>
>> Again, I only did a very quick glance at the code, but it seems good in
>> general.
>
>
> I have a problem with the "extend" function. This code:
>
> module AFW
>   extend AFWCore
>   <....>
> end
>
> (see https://github.com/jvehent/AFW/blob/master/libraries/create_rule.rb ;)
>
> works perfectly fine in chef 10.12, but not in chef <= 10.10.
>
> Quoting yfeldblum from #chef: "the problem is that there's no total order
> imposed as part of the API or part of the contract, and there's no supported
> API way for cookbooks and libraries themselves to request a partial order"
>
> What would be the right way to do this, while making certain that it won't
> break earlier/future versions of chef ?
>
> Thanks,
> Julien