Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Corrected regression with preference files name #562

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 2, 2015

Conversation

Vincent--
Copy link

Corrected a regression introduced by 351c8d5
(Default value of 50 was used for priority param when apt::setting is called inside pin.pp)
Added changes from #554

Signed-off-by: Vincent Deygas Vincent.Deygas@rewardgateway.com

Signed-off-by: Vincent Deygas <Vincent.Deygas@rewardgateway.com>
@daenney
Copy link

daenney commented Sep 2, 2015

@mhaskel I'm good with this but it would require a .minor release. It might very well be considered a regression but it changes the behaviour of the 2.x series up until now. This does make the upgrade path from 1.8 to 2.x better. What do you think?

@Vincent--
Copy link
Author

One more thing to take into account : there is no priority related to the file name for apt-preference.
The priority is given inside the file with the Pin-Priority param

So if you keep a priority number in the file name, this might be misunderstood by users not familiar with apt-preference...

@underscorgan
Copy link

@daenney yeah, I think i'm ok with this (but also think having this in a minor release rather than a bugfix would be good).

underscorgan pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 2, 2015
Corrected regression with preference files name
@underscorgan underscorgan merged commit ff37b84 into puppetlabs:master Sep 2, 2015
@underscorgan
Copy link

Thanks @Vincent-- !

@Vincent-- Vincent-- mentioned this pull request Sep 3, 2015
@LukasAud LukasAud added the bugfix label Jun 7, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants