-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
Add default installer precedence if not defined by user #6123
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
Open
Trenly
wants to merge
5
commits into
microsoft:master
Choose a base branch
from
Trenly:Precedence
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+52
−3
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
6ecbcc2
Add default installer precedence if not defined by user
Trenly 83fedd0
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into Precedence
Trenly 8f6eba1
Update Release Notes
Trenly f88311b
Empty commit for spell check
Trenly 862a499
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into Precedence
Trenly File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Feels like this should be set any time preferences are not provided.
Of if requirements are provided but preferences are not, then we set preferences to requirements by default.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I thought it could be confusing if the requirements were copied into the preferences, unless that would be useful for dependency selection?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Alternatively, we implicitly "copy" the preferences by using the requirements in
IsFirstBetterwhen the preferences are empty. That is probably cleaner than copying things in memory.If preferences are empty, then you get manifest ordering (when other fields are equal of course) among the types in the requirements. I don't think we want a case where the manifest has two types and you get one or the other based on whether you have requirements set to include both (unless it is using requirement ordering).
I feel like implicitly using the requirement ordering is the better usability option, and it feels natural to me to list my requirements in the order that I would prefer.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@denelon for an opinion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
AH, I see now - Currently the requirements are just an applicability filter that work like "Any of these are valid" but the ordering is non-consequential. By copying the requirements to the preferences (or using them in IsFirstBetter) it would allow for the ordering that the preferences give.
That makes sense to me!!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the order I put my requirements or my preferences in should be treated as an ordered list.