Piggyback on mysql cookbook #15

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into
from

Projects

None yet

2 participants

@patcon
patcon commented Sep 1, 2012

Opscode has recently made efforts to decouple the mysql cookbook from using specifically mysql, so that it can be used as a dependency for drop-in replacements.

I was working on a cookbook to scratch my own itch, and was wondering whether you'd consider accepting a PR to move your own cookbook in that direction. I'm totally willing to do the legwork :)

Here's my repo:
https://github.com/myplanetdigital/chef-percona

@patcon patcon referenced this pull request in customink-webops/percona-install Sep 1, 2012
Open

Join forces with other percona cookbook maintainers? #6

@phlipper
Owner
phlipper commented Sep 3, 2012

@patcon I'm not familiar with this current initiative. I would certainly be happy to consider it. Can you point me at some reference documentation so I can see what would be involved and how these changes would affect the current project?

Thanks!

@patcon
patcon commented Sep 3, 2012

haha sorry, no official initiative at all, just trying to remove the chaos of all the cookbooks :)

I suppose the closest thing to real written docs would be the recent CHANGELOG.md in the the mysql cookbook (it should reference all the relevant tickets):
https://github.com/opscode-cookbooks/mysql/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md

  • [COOK-1236] - Move package names into attributes to allow percona to free-ride

http://tickets.opscode.com/browse/COOK-1236

Also, forgot that this guy was interested in drop-in replacements for mysql too. He might be interested in helping out too:

//cc jschneiderhan

@patcon
patcon commented Sep 3, 2012

Maybe we could move discussion into the more general, let's-work-together thread for now?
customink-webops/percona-install#6

EDIT: oops, can't close this myself...

@phlipper
Owner
phlipper commented Sep 3, 2012

@patcon no problem. We'll continue this discussion at customink-webops/percona-install#6.

@phlipper phlipper closed this Sep 3, 2012
@patcon
patcon commented Sep 4, 2012

Hm. Sorry to be a bother, but I guess this is still the best place to discuss the refactoring that would need to happen for the actual dependency. My bad. Reopen?

Just wanted to post that this ticket is the final piece needed in order to have mysql be used in a percona recipe. Still waiting on the merge.
http://tickets.opscode.com/browse/COOK-1610

@patcon
patcon commented Sep 4, 2012

I was hoping to do this without pushing anything onto you, but it seems you've diverged a bit since you forked the mysql cookbook (?). There's lots that's the same, but some that different. Any chance you could take a look when you get the time and see whether you think it's possible to reconcile? (with PR's to the mysql cookbook, or otherwise)

Cheers!

@phlipper phlipper reopened this Sep 4, 2012
@phlipper
Owner
phlipper commented Sep 4, 2012

@patcon I'm definitely open to these updates. This cookbook was started from scratch and was not a fork from any existing cookbooks.

I just merged one of your other pull requests and now this can't be automatically merged at the moment. Would you mind rebasing and pushing so I can take a closer look? Thanks!

@patcon
patcon commented Sep 4, 2012

Oh god, it wasn't ready to merge anyhow :)
It will take a lot of care to merge in the server recipe without disrupting how you're using it, so I'd probably need some help testing it with your setup (and maybe giving advice on whether we could take the mysql cookbook's approach to solving a problem you might have tackled a littler differently).

I'll reroll the in-progress changes though

@phlipper
Owner

@patcon any movement on this? I've got another window to look at it with you if you're still interested.

@patcon
patcon commented Dec 28, 2012

Unfortunately no movement, as my cookbook (in extending the mysql cookbook) solved my needs at the time, and it was always just a personal itch to scratch in backporting the extra features of this cookbook :)

I've commented on a few issues, but my thoughts are that this is the canonical issue that makes sense to work on before duplicating efforts in resolving some of the others. I have no pressing plans to backport, but it's still something I'd like to do when I revisit the depending project

/cc @santiagogil since he was interested in this as well.

Cheers!

@phlipper
Owner
phlipper commented Mar 3, 2013

This pull request is pretty out of date at this point. I am closing it for now but will re-open if there is any new activity.

@phlipper phlipper closed this Mar 3, 2013
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment