[chef] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: knife.rb cookbook_path with Berkshelf

["Mark H. Nichols" < >]

On Aug 21, 2013, at 2:47 PM, Ranjib Dey < "> > wrote:

this is expected right? When you say branch you it expand to the HEAD of that branch, which might be different revision at different point in time. If you dont want that, either use tag or revision

I am not getting why you want a meaningful name in the cache directory?

I can't run `knife cookbook upload ome_jboss` since berks added the Git SHA to the directory name in .berkshelf/cookbooks. 

`berk install -p` foo will copy over the correct (as specified by berksfile) version in foo. You can alias point cookbook_dir to a vendor directory, and alias knife upload to invoke (berks install -p vendor && knife cookbook upload) berks install , 

It looks like your alias was cut off. I don't follow what you intend.

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Mark H. Nichols < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

On Aug 21, 2013, at 2:34 PM, Ranjib Dey < "> > wrote:

> you can specify any valid git rev iirc (i.e. branch, sha, tag etc), since berks uses the ~/.berkshelf/cookbooks as cache directory, it will store all the versions that you have specified in your berksfile.

I have successfully used branch before. However the resulting directory under .berkshelf/cookbooks includes the Git SHA as part of the name. Over time I've accumulated several versions of the same cookbook that all have different SHAs as a part of the directory name. What I can't figure out is how to get a more meaningful name created via Berkshelf when I pull the cookbook from Github. Having to specify `knife cookbook upload ome_jboss-daa338348c4d14e9e1abe693ecc98dfc6d412f5c` isn't going to be a lot of fun.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail