Needs maintainers

[thommay]

Chef does not (and hasn't for a long time) recommend using this plugin - we think test-kitchen is a better pattern for all the work we do.
Given that, we need to find maintainers that use this plugin who are happy to review code, fix issues and make releases.
@timvisher @Tcharl @tknerr y'all have contributed work to this plugin, would you be interested in helping to maintain it?

[Tcharl]

Hi @thommay ,

I'm really a ruby noob, and I don't even know how to compile and use it ^^. So sorry, maybe when I'll be more confortable with all that stuff. I use chef and vagrant as a hobby on my spare time so...

However, I'm now using chef, but having both is kinda nice ^^.
Regards

[timvisher]

Sadly I can't help. I agree that test-kitchen is a fundamentally better option.

[thommay]

OK. Status right now is that in the absence of new maintainers we'll likely do a release to support vagrant 2.0 and then mark this as entirely deprecated.

[timvisher]

That sounds very reasonable to me.

[tknerr]

Sorry, same here. Not using this plugin anymore...

+1 for a vagrant 2.0 compatibility release though, in case someone still uses it.

[etki]

Actually i've been using this plugin simply to provision my dev box (it's not a test box, i just need to pull other cookbooks to run my own, e.g. use elasticsearch cookbook to bring up ES). As far as i've understood this is not considered as a common use case scenario, so i feel now like i'm missing something and the whole world has been doing this in other way. Can you shed some light on how provision dependencies should be installed?

[Tcharl]

Yes, as a devbox, this plugin is very nice :-). Before testing, we should sometimes be able to instantiate components ^^.

[timvisher]

@etki When a few bugs hit me a while ago I realized that I could do what this plugin was doing for me by writing a very basic script that first ran berks vendor into the cookbook directory of the project and then run vagrant X. That's what I would recommend you do. Obviously add the vendored cookbooks directory to your gitignore or whatever.

[etki]

@timvisher that's a pity, i thought there was another fully-automated way (building some project that is erm windows guy-oriented and the less the mess, the better). Thank you!

[timvisher]

@etki Yeah, it is a bit of a shame. FWIW, that's basically what this plugin is so if you wanted to take over as maintainer you'd have your solution. :)

[gavvvr]

It is not clear to me what should I use if my goal is to set up a virtual machine with Vagrant and apply cookbooks (without testing).
Which Workflow is supposed now? kitchen converge with supplying settings in Vagranrfile like this?

driver:
  name: vagrant
  vagrantfiles:
    - VagrantfileKitchen.rb

[timvisher]

@gavvvr You set up your Vagrantfile to reference a directory managed by berks vendor.

I pushed up a quick little demo of this. I script most of it. https://github.com/timvisher/berks-demo

[timvisher]

@gavvvr Under no circumstances should you use kitchen to managed your actual dev boxes. kitchen is purely for testing. It can provision a box and you could use it for that but you're really hitting a screw with a hammer at that point.

[etki]

@timvisher i'm terribly sorry, i would love to, but i guess we share the same not-enough-time case :/ I know that OSS doesn't live by itself, but i know in advance i won't handle it :\

[gavvvr]

@timvisher great, thank you! Dependencies are resolved even without berks vendor. I just use vagrant up and it does all the job.