> Nice - thanks for this - just one comment about the priority value - I think
> we should be explicit and configure the repo with a higher priority value,
> hence I suggest adding 1 to the value obtained from apt-cache policy.
Thanks for the feedback Alex! We could always use a higher priority, b
Review: Needs Fixing
Nice - thanks for this - just one comment about the priority value - I think we
should be explicit and configure the repo with a higher priority value, hence I
suggest adding 1 to the value obtained from apt-cache policy.
Diff comments:
> diff --git a/vm-tools/uvt b/vm-too
Octavio Galland has proposed merging
~octagalland/ubuntu-qa-tools:uvt_repo_prioritize_local into
ubuntu-qa-tools:master.
Commit message:
make uvt repo prioritize local repository
Requested reviews:
Ubuntu Bug Control (ubuntu-bugcontrol)
For more details, see:
https://code.launchpad.net/~octa
Ah good point - thanks for the clarification. For future reference could you
add a comment in the code explaining this as well, ie. why we are using the
same priority value? Thanks.
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~octagalland/ubuntu-qa-tools/+git/ubuntu-qa-tools/+merge/470446
Your team Ubuntu Bug
Thanks for the feedback Alex! We could always use a higher priority, but the
reason I was hesitant to do that is because I'd still want old versions in the
local repo to be superseded by newer versions in the archive/ppas. For
instance, if someone is working on a patch for a package with version
5 matches
Mail list logo
