You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Two days ago, I built a Berksfile.lock by running berks install against a Berksfile.
Now, when I run berks install, it is picking up a newer version of apache2 and updating the lock file.
What is the point of a lock file if it is ignored? I need a way to consistently test all dependencies in a development environment before going to production, and as a result of this behavior I am unable to use berkshelf for cookbook management.
Is there a 'strict' option that will follow the lock file or die? Or will the .lock file simply never be strictly followed? This has been an issue since the 0.x versions, and it keeps getting labeled as fixed in the next version... 1.x was supposed to fix it, 2.x was supposed to fix it. 3.x has a completely new api-driven dependency graph generation that resolves this! (No, it doesn't, this occurred today with 3.0.1)
Related, or identical: #637 #815
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Wow you're quick, thanks Jamie!
We'll get it tested ASAP and update here if there's any problems
Also: I'm really really excited about the ChefDK, will be putting together a mini-presentation to hopefully convince my team to stop all of the really bad dev and test practices we've developed over the last couple years.
Two days ago, I built a Berksfile.lock by running berks install against a Berksfile.
Now, when I run berks install, it is picking up a newer version of apache2 and updating the lock file.
What is the point of a lock file if it is ignored? I need a way to consistently test all dependencies in a development environment before going to production, and as a result of this behavior I am unable to use berkshelf for cookbook management.
Is there a 'strict' option that will follow the lock file or die? Or will the .lock file simply never be strictly followed? This has been an issue since the 0.x versions, and it keeps getting labeled as fixed in the next version... 1.x was supposed to fix it, 2.x was supposed to fix it. 3.x has a completely new api-driven dependency graph generation that resolves this! (No, it doesn't, this occurred today with 3.0.1)
Related, or identical:
#637
#815
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: