CentOS and Fedora boxes packed without docs?

[shortdudey123]

Some cookbooks rely on copying default or example configs out of the package docs. Testing this does not appear possible under the CentOS 6.5 and newer boxes since they are excluded. Same with Fedora.

Any reason to not include them in the future?

Kudos to @chewi for tracking it down

[juliandunn]

It's to keep the box sizes small. And also, I'd argue it's not best practice for the cookbook author to be doing things like IO.read of files and copying them places. That's not guaranteed to be reproducible every time.

[shortdudey123]

What would be a better way to get the example configs then? I guess they could be pulled from the project source online

Specific example:
https://github.com/hw-cookbooks/auditd/blob/master/providers/builtins.rb#L28
https://github.com/hw-cookbooks/auditd/blob/master/providers/builtins.rb#L33

[chewi]

To be honest, I'm not a big fan of the "built-in rules" feature either. I only fixed it up because it was already there and needed improving. Do people really use these rules as-is? We'll be writing our own. Evidently someone saw fit to implement this but they could have just as easily written a wrapper cookbook for their own needs.

I once did something similar to instantiate the rsyslog database using a schema from /usr/share/doc but that was never merged and I suppose I could have simply included the schema in the cookbook.

I wonder what @webframp thinks.

[shortdudey123]

Agree, i am not a fan either

[juliandunn]

@shortdudey123 yeah, the best idea is to pull the configs from a known source (bundling them inside the cookbook is one option). As such I'm going to close this issue as "won't fix".