Resolve dependency tree with different cookbooks that share the same name

[kenny-evitt]

This may be a contrived issue – I really only ran into it because I have two cookbooks, one of which was forked from the other, and I replaced one dependency in the first cookbook with a dependency on another cookbook but with the same name.

For cookbook1, I had problems with the Supermarket postgresql cookbook so I replaced it with this cookbook.

cookbook2 still depends on the Supermarket postgresql cookbook.

In my specific circumstances, this is a non-issue. But I can certainly imagine someone wanting to use both of the postgresql cookbooks.

Maybe this only makes sense for infrastructure mode.

[luckymike]

I don't think this is a contrived issue. We've discussed a similar use case internally. I think this is an enhancement we'll be adding in the near future.

[chrisroberts]

Hi! So, #69 allows for single cookbooks to have multiple sources. However, in #66 I discussed a little around why having multiple implementations under a common name is not a good run time situation and would highly caution against it in practice. That said, #69 covers what you're looking for and should be released shortly.

Cheers!

[chrisroberts]

Multiple source support for single cookbooks in infrastructure mode is available as of version 0.3.12. Thanks!

[kenny-evitt]

@chrisroberts Thanks!