[chef] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depending on yum '< 3'

[Jorge Bianquetti < >]

OK, now it's working.


Thanks !



2013/12/12 Sean OMeara 
<
 >:
> Pretty sure I got that one too.
> https://gist.github.com/someara/76c4daf6ccfbd80ab42f
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Jorge Bianquetti 
> <
 >
> wrote:
>>
>> Ups! Sorry I mean nginx
>>
>> On github: 2.0.9
>>
>>
>> On community:
>> $ knife cookbook site show nginx
>> average_rating: 3.96552
>> category:       Web Servers
>> created_at:     2009-10-25T23:52:41Z
>> description:    Installs and configures nginx
>> external_url:   github.com/opscode-cookbooks/nginx
>> latest_version:
>> http://cookbooks.opscode.com/api/v1/cookbooks/nginx/versions/2_0_8
>> maintainer:     opscode
>> name:           nginx
>> updated_at:     2013-12-12T02:16:01Z
>> versions:
>>
>> 2013/12/12 Sean OMeara 
>> <
 >:
>> > Looks good to me: https://gist.github.com/someara/944ea80667ad5ccaa005
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Jorge Bianquetti
>> > <
 >
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> AFAIK, git.
>> >>
>> >> On github: 2.8.5
>> >>
>> >> On community :
>> >>
>> >> $ knife cookbook site show git
>> >> average_rating: 5.0
>> >> category:       Utilities
>> >> created_at:     2009-10-28T19:13:29Z
>> >> description:    Installs git and/or sets up a Git server daemon
>> >> external_url:   github.com/opscode-cookbooks/git
>> >> latest_version:
>> >> http://cookbooks.opscode.com/api/v1/cookbooks/git/versions/2_8_4
>> >> maintainer:     opscode
>> >> name:           git
>> >> updated_at:     2013-12-12T02:14:46Z
>> >>
>> >> 2013/12/12 Sean OMeara 
>> >> <
 >:
>> >> > for which cookbook(s)?
>> >> > -s
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Jorge Bianquetti
>> >> > <
 >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> knife cookbook site show  still shows affected versions.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2013/12/12 Sean OMeara 
>> >> >> <
 >:
>> >> >> > Sorry about that hitch.... I updated everything to include '< 3.0'
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > satisfy the x.y format
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 3:45 AM, Jorge Bianquetti
>> >> >> > <
 >
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I get this error when I try to use any of the cookbooks updated
>> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> include:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> depends 'yum', '<3'
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>        [2013-12-12T08:40:37+00:00] ERROR: '3' does not match
>> >> >> >> 'x.y.z'
>> >> >> >> or
>> >> >> >> 'x.y'
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> If I change this lines to:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> depends 'yum', '<3.0'
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> cookbook works without issues
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I'm using Chef 11.8.2-1.ubuntu.12.04, installed from Omnibus.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Nobody have same issue?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> 2013/12/9 Sean OMeara 
>> >> >> >> <
 >:
>> >> >> >> > Hi Mike.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Indeed, yum is a fundamental building block. That is why it's
>> >> >> >> > important
>> >> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> > be as solid as possible. The rewrite is part of COOKs focus on
>> >> >> >> > well
>> >> >> >> > engineered primitives.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > We also need some easy-to-point-to "example cookbooks" we can
>> >> >> >> > point
>> >> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> > and
>> >> >> >> > say "write your cookbook like that". In general, people tend to
>> >> >> >> > copy
>> >> >> >> > patterns they see, especially newcomers.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > I've added aliases for :create :add :remove, and :delete, as
>> >> >> >> > well
>> >> >> >> > as
>> >> >> >> > baseurl/url and gpgkey/keyurl. That should help smooth the
>> >> >> >> > transition.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > If you can help me test this, it would be amazing.
>> >> >> >> > Thanks!
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > -s
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Mike 
>> >> >> >> > <
 >
>> >> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Sean,
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> From an initial test, the most naive one I've got, is this:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Berksfile:
>> >> >> >> >> cookbook 'yum', github: 'opscode-cookbooks/yum', branch:
>> >> >> >> >> 'tableflip'
>> >> >> >> >> #
>> >> >> >> >> Test out yum 3.x branch
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Cookbook:
>> >> >> >> >>   yum_repository "datadog" do
>> >> >> >> >>     name "datadog"
>> >> >> >> >>     description "datadog"
>> >> >> >> >>     url "http://yum.datadoghq.com/rpm";
>> >> >> >> >>     action :add
>> >> >> >> >>   end
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Fails due to the 'url' resource param being missing,
>> >> >> >> >> apparently
>> >> >> >> >> this
>> >> >> >> >> has
>> >> >> >> >> been renamed to 'baseurl', and the action :add is gone, is now
>> >> >> >> >> :create.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> - Is there a way to create aliases for LWRP parameters, so
>> >> >> >> >> that
>> >> >> >> >> we
>> >> >> >> >> could
>> >> >> >> >> possibly have an `alias :baseurl :url`, `alias :action_add
>> >> >> >> >> :action_create`
>> >> >> >> >> and such, so we could maintain some more backwards
>> >> >> >> >> compatibility?
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Parameter aliasing is used in some base resources:
>> >> >> >> >> Ref:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> https://github.com/opscode/chef/blob/master/lib/chef/resource/git.rb#L40-L43
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> https://github.com/opscode/chef/blob/10-stable/chef/lib/chef/resource/git.rb#L40-L43
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Here's an example of aliasing in a provider, where
>> >> >> >> >> `action_create`
>> >> >> >> >> is
>> >> >> >> >> now
>> >> >> >> >> also `action_run` for the ruby_block resource:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> https://github.com/opscode/chef/blob/10-stable/chef/lib/chef/provider/ruby_block.rb#L31
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> https://github.com/opscode/chef/blob/master/lib/chef/provider/ruby_block.rb#L38
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> I don't know if LWRPs will provide the same amount of
>> >> >> >> >> functionality,
>> >> >> >> >> someone more deep inside LWRPs should probably answer that.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> At least for one more Major version, with deprecation
>> >> >> >> >> warnings,
>> >> >> >> >> if
>> >> >> >> >> at
>> >> >> >> >> all
>> >> >> >> >> possible.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> - It appears gpgcheck default switched from false to true -
>> >> >> >> >> any
>> >> >> >> >> reason
>> >> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> >> not keep that false, and have the conditional swap based on
>> >> >> >> >> providing a
>> >> >> >> >> gpgkey param? This was the previous behavior, as if I don't
>> >> >> >> >> pass
>> >> >> >> >> a
>> >> >> >> >> gpgkey
>> >> >> >> >> explicitly, I'd get the default of no gpgcheck.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> In general this looks pretty awesome, includes a bunch of new
>> >> >> >> >> tests,
>> >> >> >> >> code
>> >> >> >> >> quality, what have you.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> My biggest question is:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> - Considering that the driving factor for most cookbook
>> >> >> >> >> changes
>> >> >> >> >> is
>> >> >> >> >> handled
>> >> >> >> >> within the context of a Ticket, which is then reviewed,
>> >> >> >> >> discussed,
>> >> >> >> >> etc
>> >> >> >> >> - is
>> >> >> >> >> there one associated with this change, that discusses the
>> >> >> >> >> motivation,
>> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> need, etc?
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> The reason I'm delving deep into this one is because it's a
>> >> >> >> >> fundamental
>> >> >> >> >> building block for anyone using/deploying software, and has a
>> >> >> >> >> lot
>> >> >> >> >> of
>> >> >> >> >> potential for unexpected Bad Stuff, and getting my cookbook
>> >> >> >> >> updated
>> >> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> >> constrain on a prior version of this cookbook, and then
>> >> >> >> >> getting
>> >> >> >> >> that
>> >> >> >> >> change
>> >> >> >> >> out to every user of my cookbook might be a little
>> >> >> >> >> time-constrained
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Thanks for playing,
>> >> >> >> >> -Mike
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> PS: I'd note that the current branch's repo still uses version
>> >> >> >> >> string
>> >> >> >> >> 2.4.3 - Another use case for Semantic Versioning identifiers
>> >> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> >> allow
>> >> >> >> >> this
>> >> >> >> >> to be 3.0.0.dev or such, but that's already a whole other bag
>> >> >> >> >> of
>> >> >> >> >> marbles.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Mike 
>> >> >> >> >> <
 >
>> >> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>> Looks like the branch is here:
>> >> >> >> >>> https://github.com/opscode-cookbooks/yum/tree/tableflip
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>> On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Wolfe, Eric G
>> >> >> >> >>> <
 >
>> >> >> >> >>> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> Got a branch we can review before the release?
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> Sean OMeara 
>> >> >> >> >>>> <
 >
>> >> >> >> >>>>  wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> Dear Chef People:
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> In one week, I will be releasing a new yum cookbook to the
>> >> >> >> >>>> community
>> >> >> >> >>>> site that will Break All The Things. If you depend on yum,
>> >> >> >> >>>> please
>> >> >> >> >>>> lock to '<
>> >> >> >> >>>> 3' in your metadata.rb to avoid trouble.
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> Thanks.
>> >> >> >> >>>> -s
>> >> >> >> >>>> —
>> >> >> >> >>>> Sent from Mailbox<https://www.dropbox.com/mailbox> for
>> >> >> >> >>>> iPhone
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>> >
>
>