[chef] Single centralized git repo vs. git repo per cookbook


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Alex Myasnikov < >
  • To: " " < >
  • Subject: [chef] Single centralized git repo vs. git repo per cookbook
  • Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 22:14:15 +0000
  • Accept-language: en-US

Ohai Chefs,

 

I am trying to understand what advantages (and disadvantages if any?) are there in having a git repo per each cookbook in the chef-repo as opposed to having all of one’s application cookbooks in a single git repo.

 

Up to this point I was thinking of a single repo containing all cookbooks (minus community ones managed by Berkshelf), however I came across a few references (below) that mentioned having git repo per cookbook. It seems like the latter helps CI, but I am not sure how exactly and what tangible benefits are there and what potential tradeoffs are. Is having a repo per each cookbook that’s developed constitutes a best practice?

 

First reference is from last year’s ChefConf presentation in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipSudpDYhTM  (Slide depicting master repo consisting of individual repos per cookbook)

 

And then Nathen Harvey’s blog post on MVT had this snippet:

  1. gem install foodcritic
  2. Go to Travis CI and follow the Sign In link at the top.
  3. Activate the GitHub Service Hook for your cookbook’s repository from your TravisCI profile page. Each of your cookbooks has its own repository, right?!

http://technology.customink.com/blog/2012/06/04/mvt-foodcritic-and-travis-ci/

 

Setup:

 

Chef Server 11

Berkshelf 2.X

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Alex




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

§