[chef] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [chef-dev] Ownership Changes of Chef Cookbooks Revisited

[Lamont Granquist < >]

On Tue May 27 10:05:48 2014, Rajiv Ranganath wrote:
> I don't mean to hijack this thread. Lamont is making a **very** good
> point and I wanted to give an example of what is possible.
>
> If this is an approach that is interesting to you, I'll be at DevOps
> Days Silicon Valley and we can continue the conversation there. I can
> also show you some other things this approach allows us to do.
>
> Thank you!
>
> Best,
> Rajiv

I don't think this is a hijack at all.  What I'd really like to see is 
either the public supermarket instance supporting namespaces a bit more 
explicitly, or else the ability for you to run your own supermarket 
instance and the tools like berkshelf and knife cookbook site supporting 
pulling/pushing to your instance via some simple config.  And I'd prefer 
to discuss whatever problems you are seeing with supporting your own 
community than trying to fix the governance problems in the existing 
Chef community site (although to be fair we should probably come up with 
better governance policy there, but I think if we can start seeing 
community forks of the community site that the requirements for the 
existing community site will start to change --  and I kind of hope the 
community will run faster at this problem than we can respond to it and 
fix the problems while we're still trying to react, and that we should 
focus on trying to enable what you're doing).

And Amazon Linux is a great example since its RHEL-like and we already 
don't do RHEL entirely well (see SELinux + apache cookbook) and then 
Amazon Linux is that odd mashup of different RHELs with fedora bits in 
it which makes it have other strange edge conditions, and nobody uses it 
much around the office here.  It'll most likely be much better served by 
your fork.