apt::pin ignores order parameter

[alext]

Describe the Bug

The order parameter to the apt::pin resource is ignored and has no effect.

Expected Behavior

Given the following:

apt::pin { 'alpha':
  packages => 'something',
  priority => 300,
  order => 20,
}
apt::pin { 'bravo':
  packages => 'something',
  version => '1.2.3',
  priority => 600,
  order => 10,
}

I'd expect the files 10bravo.pref and 20alpha.pref to be created in /etc/apt/preferences.d so that bravo takes priority over alpha when read by apt..

Steps to Reproduce

Given code like the above, observe that the order property is ignored, and the created files are called alpha.pref and bravo.pref.

Environment

• Version 9.0.2
• Platform Ubuntu 22.04

Additional Context

I think this stems from these lines in setting.pp that ignores the priority value for "list" and "pref" type settings.

[jps-help]

I've just noticed the same issue as well. Seems like an easy enough fix, however it will likely be a breaking change since it would update all existing .prefs files with a new prefix.

I will see if I can draft a PR

[jps-help]

I've been looking into this but not sure what the best practice is for naming of APT preferences.

Documentation explicitly states

File naming in /etc/apt/preferences. d/ is free but the last in alphabetical order takes precedence.

So the ordering of files makes sense to ensure preferences are evaluated correctly. However, the numbered prefex is not mandatory and I know of at least one example where a vendor (Ubuntu) is not using them.

$ ls -l /etc/apt/preferences.d/ubuntu-pro-esm-*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 437 Apr  2 14:13 /etc/apt/preferences.d/ubuntu-pro-esm-apps
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 429 Apr  2 14:13 /etc/apt/preferences.d/ubuntu-pro-esm-infra

If we force the use of the order/priority parameter and prefix all managed .prefs files, we would essentially make all managed resources lower priority to vendor configs which don't follow that naming scheme.

In this case, it might be best if we leave the apt::pin type as-is and just use the resource title to create the needed priorities.
e.g. manually naming the resource 99-my-pref

[jps-help]

If this is agreed as the best option, we could do a bit of cleanup on the apt::pin defined type since the order param isn't really needed and a default is supplied by apt::setting anyway.