[chef] Re: Re: RE: Single Repo vs Repo per cookbook

[Yoshi Spendiff < >]

Isn't that only a problem if you have multiple repos with multiple cookbooks?  If you've got one repo with all your role and wrapper cookbooks, and then peel off individual library cookbooks which are one-cookbook-per-repo then it should work okay and you can just use `path: ../some_cookbook` in the Berksfile for the internal dependencies of the monolithic repo, and avoid having the library cookbooks having deps back into your monolithic repo (which would smell like you're starting to create circular dependencies).

Berkshelf should work fine for this model as well.

I think this is a bit of a moot point isn't it? You CAN actually specify a git repository that has multiple cookbooks, using the rel: option. You just can't do this in a single Berksfile declaration, which is never going to be supported.

I was more asking if you SHOULD rather than if you COULD. It's definitely possible.

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Lamont Granquist < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

On 4/13/15 1:17 PM, Kevin Keane Subscription wrote:

The problem with berkshelf is that you can specify a git repository as source per cookbook, but you can't really specify a git repository that contains multiple cookbooks.

Isn't that only a problem if you have multiple repos with multiple cookbooks?  If you've got one repo with all your role and wrapper cookbooks, and then peel off individual library cookbooks which are one-cookbook-per-repo then it should work okay and you can just use `path: ../some_cookbook` in the Berksfile for the internal dependencies of the monolithic repo, and avoid having the library cookbooks having deps back into your monolithic repo (which would smell like you're starting to create circular dependencies).

Berkshelf should work fine for this model as well.

--

Yoshi Spendiff

DevOps Engineer

Indochino

Mobile: +1 778 952 2025

Email: " target="_blank">