Fixes #14460 - Add ability to use local Gemfiles

[cpeters]

No description provided.

[theforeman-bot]

There were the following issues with the commit message:

• d170122 must be in the format fixes #redmine_number - brief description

If you don't have a ticket number, please create an issue in Redmine, selecting the appropriate project.

More guidelines are available on the Foreman wiki.

---

This message was auto-generated by Foreman's prprocessor

[stbenjam]

Oops, sorry, looks like we did turn on redmine issues for the repo.

@cpeters Can you file one please?

[cpeters]

@stbenjam Updated

[stbenjam]

Shouldn't we do the same as Foreman and Smart Proxy and read a Gemfile.local.rb from bundler.d? Or is there somewhere else that the other repos support this Gemfile.local thing that I missed?

They seem to do it this way:

Dir["#{File.dirname(__FILE__)}/bundler.d/*.rb"].each do |bundle|
  self.instance_eval(Bundler.read_file(bundle))
end

[cpeters]

@stbenjam The hammer cli plugins do it with a Gemfile.local file.

https://github.com/theforeman/hammer-cli-foreman-discovery/blob/master/Gemfile#L18-L19

I'm not opposed to doing it with bundler.d similar to Foreman

[stbenjam]

Ok cool, how about Foreman's style then?

[shlomizadok]

+1 for Foreman style

[cpeters]

@stbenjam @shlomizadok Updated

[stbenjam]

Oh, bundler.d is already used, the dynflow.rb is copied to the smart proxy dir using this path. It's the same in all the smart proxy plugins. It's causing an error to actually process gems from that dir, since it's including itself.

See packaging: https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-packaging/blob/rpm/develop/rubygem-smart_proxy_dynflow/rubygem-smart_proxy_dynflow.spec#L63

So I'm not sure, maybe we should adopt the hammer style.

[cpeters]

Yeah. I tried modifying the gemspec, removing the bundler.d from gem.files and still ran into a bundler issue.

I also tried creating a bundler.d/smart-proxy-local.rb file and having the gemspec include it but it still fetched smart-proxy from upstream despite me pointing to a downstream git repo.

[stbenjam]

The packaging gets it from the gem, so it needs to stay.

[cpeters]

@stbenjam Ok; back to the original with pulling Gemfile.local into the Gemfile.

[stbenjam]

Looks good to me, thanks! Will merge tomorrow, just want to give the others on @theforeman/remote-execution a chance to make sure it's ok for them.

[iNecas]

bikesheding: Gemfile.local.rb would be better, as editors recognize it's a ruby source.

Also adding it to .gitignore would make sense here

[iNecas]

Thanks @stbenjam for waiting :)

[cpeters]

@iNecas Updated

[iNecas]

👍

[stbenjam]

I was inclined to also make the .rb comment, but didn't because we'll have 3 different ways of doing this in the Foreman org (bundler.d, Gemfile.local.rb, and Gemfile.local). 😿 https://xkcd.com/927/

Anyway, it's the right solution. I opened a RM against hammer. http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/14466

[stbenjam]

Merging, thanks @cpeters, @iNecas