[chef] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Role Versioning?

[Andrea Campi < >]

I'll second that: a search for roles looks for an interface, a search for a recipe looks for an implementation detail.

If my app needs an SMTP server, I don't need to know whether that's sendmail or postfix; I want to look for a "outgoing_smtp" role or something like that.

Sure, I could have a "outgoing_smtp" cookbook and know that by convention it has a "default" recipe that is doing whatever is necessary--but that's extra ceremony in my book.

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Brian Akins < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 12:56 AM, Torben Knerr < "> > wrote:
> I would even go that far and state that using search "recipe:*" is an
> antipattern and should not be used in community cookbooks (due to the
> include_recipe flaws).

I think it's an anti-pattern, but not because of the "flaw" in
include_recipe.  I don't like cookbook A having to know implementation
details about cookbook B. That's why I like the "service registry"
approach: node A says I have this service with these attributes (who
cares from which cookbook) and node B can ask for all the nodes (and
service attributes) that have that service.  I can make the same
argument about depending on  certain roles for search, etc - it seems
to expose (and lock you into) certain implementation details.

--Brian