[chef] Re: Re: Is Supermarket replacing Berkshelf-API server?

[Christopher Webber < >]

So here is where I stand on things (full disclosure, Supermarket is kinda my 
thing at Chef):

The Berkshelf API server is perfect if what you want to do is index what you 
Chef Server has. It is simple and lightweight.

On the other hand, if what you are trying to do is build an internal 
community around cookbooks and want to have a Berkshelf endpoint that has 
more than what is on your Chef Server, Supermarket may make more sense but 
there is more involved in running it, especially since we haven’t built an 
omnibus package yet.

Supermarket at a base level is a rails app with sidekiq, using postgres and 
redis. If you plan to support more than one frontend you will need to have an 
S3 compatible backend for storage as well.

Thanks.

— cwebber

On Aug 25, 2014, at 2:23 PM, Daniel DeLeo 
<
 >
 wrote:

> On Monday, August 25, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Durfee, Bernie (GE Global Research) 
> wrote:
>> Should I be spending time setting up a Berkshelf API server or a 
>> Supermarket server?
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Bernie
> 
> 
> The answer to this is, it depends on what you want to do.
> 
> Supermarket is open source and you are certainly welcome to set up your own 
> if you like. To run it, you’ll need to manage a few services (I haven’t 
> done this personally, but I think you at least need the supermarket service 
> and a service called oc-id that uses oauth2 to authenticate you to 
> supermarket using your enterprise chef credentials).
> 
> That said, we have accepted an RFC to implement a “universe” endpoint for 
> chef-server that will provide a tool like berkshelf with the data it needs 
> to solve dependencies so you can host your cookbooks on your regular Chef 
> server. See: 
> https://github.com/opscode/chef-rfc/blob/master/rfc014-universe-endpoint.md
> 
> How are you using Berkshelf API now (or, what configuration were you 
> considering)?
> 
> --  
> Daniel DeLeo
> 
> 
>