> DEFAULT_IMAGE_ORDERING made me think the intention was to allow it to be > overridden
Yes, I was curious about the name too. Wasn't sure, though, whether it was intended to be overridden by the **user** or for certain **providers**. I'm also on the fence; just think that if we go for ordering we need to document the "contract" that the template builder parses an _ordered_ list of matching images and returns the top one. Then it obviously makes sense for you to be able to influence the ordering. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/166#issuecomment-25548503
