[chef] Re: Couple of test-kitchen questions

[Joshua Timberman < >]

On Nov 3, 2012, at 8:42 PM, David Petzel 
<
 >
 wrote:

> The tearing down isn't so much my problem as having all the VMs up and 
> running at once. Unless I'm misunderstanding, I believe the command line 
> above would still in result in all VMs running at the same time by the end 
> of the successful run? Basically what I'm looking for is on a successful 
> run of a configuration on a platform, shutdown (not destroy) that platform, 
> before moving onto the next 

Ah, yes. All the vagrant boxes will be running until the kitchen destroy 
command is issued.

> I probably should clarify that I'm on a windows workstation, so Rubyin 
> general is just obnoxiously slow to start at times, so I think the syntax 
> check times are more a result of how long it takes ruby to initialize on my 
> workstation than the checks themselves. Whatever the cause of the slowness 
> (and the quantify of it), it would be nice to be able to just "skip it" 
> when desired.

Everything working okay on Windows? There were conversations at the summit 
that indicated that test kitchen doesn't actually yet run on Windows. If you 
had to do anything special to get that going, or if it just worked following 
the README, I'd like to hear it.

> I don't mind the work that is done, and I don't want to skip it all the 
> time (which can be done fairly easily via the Kitchenfile, but I'd like the 
> ability to skip on demand. I.E., while iterating, say "don't do all the 
> cool stuff, just provision.". Its obviously not a huge deal, and the time 
> that test-kitchen saves dwarfs this by orders of magnitude, so I don' want 
> it to sound like a complaint per say, but rather just exploring tiny time 
> savers

Time savers add up, of course. If you can determine where additional 
optimization can occur, please do open a KITCHEN ticket.

Cheers!

-- 
Opscode, Inc
Joshua Timberman, Technical Community Manager
IRC, Skype, Twitter, Github: jtimberman