#1511 closed defect (bug) (invalid)
Users page should sort by role seniority, not by role alphabetically. [PATCH]
| Reported by: |
|
Owned by: |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Milestone: | Priority: | normal | |
| Severity: | minor | Version: | 1.6 |
| Component: | Administration | Keywords: | bg|has-patch bg|commit |
| Focuses: | Cc: |
Description
On the users page, the users list is currently sorted by role alphabetically. This isn't very useful, I expect roles to be sorted by how senior they are. I.e., the administrator is at the top, and it goes down through editor, author, then contributor, finally subscriber and then inactive.
The attached diff does this.
Attachments (1)
Change History (9)
#1
@
21 years ago
- Keywords bg|has-patch bg|dev-feedback bg|2nd-opinion added
- Milestone set to 1.6
- Owner changed from anonymous to skippy
- Status changed from new to assigned
#3
@
21 years ago
- Keywords bg|commit added; bg|dev-feedback bg|2nd-opinion removed
I like it.
See also #1660 for a related issue (where the roles weren't being properly assigned)
#4
@
21 years ago
Two points:
1.Removing and re-adding a role would reorganize the role list so the concept of seniority (which is only coincidal from the way the roles are added by the installer) wouldn't be true.
2.There is no intrinsic indicator in the name of a role that one role is greater than another, so seniority of a role is not apparent to a user from its name.
Consider - you are looking at an English dictionary in which the words are ordered by some number of "seniority" I have applied to each word. This number is not visible anywhere near the word's definition. Choose a word, open to a random page, and then tell me if the word you chose appears before or after that random page.
So although you might be able to organize roles using the order they appear in the database, there is no indicator to the user that the roles are sorted that way, or what the sort value is for the role they're looking for, especially if they've customized the roles.
Don't commit this patch - sort by alpha only.
#5
@
20 years ago
It doesn't really sort in alpha either. Here's the User List by Role order:
Administrator ID Username 1 admin 12 level10 9 level8 24 level8a 10 level9 25 level9a Contributor ID Username 2 level1 18 level1a Author ID Username 3 level2 17 level2a 4 level3 20 level3a 5 level4 26 level4a Editor ID Username 6 level5 7 level6 22 level6a 8 level7 23 level7a Subscriber ID Username 11 level0 ID Username 31 added1.6user
#7
@
20 years ago
- Resolution set to invalid
- Status changed from assigned to closed
Calling invalid as we've declared before that the new system isn't meant to be any kind of hierarchy. As ringmaster said, plugins messing around with roles will probably break things anyway. Reopen if anyone can argue for this bug.
New patch. Sort alphabetically within roles.