The participant lists currently sort by join order, which seems less useful than sorting alphabetically. For example, it makes it more difficult to quickly assess if a specific user is a room member.
Description
Description
Revisions and Commits
Revisions and Commits
| Status | Assigned | Task | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resolved | btrahan | T7565 Ship Conpherence v2 | ||
| Resolved | btrahan | T7571 Conpherence v2 Errata | ||
| Resolved | btrahan | T7765 Room and thread participant lists should sort alphabetically |
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
I do think two possibly-reasonable exceptions are:
- Maybe sort you to the top;
- maybe sort users who can edit the room to the top (in rooms only) -- basically, "admins first".
Comment Actions
A better description of this task is probably "Participant lists should have a meaningful, obvious ordering".
If they already have a meaningful (but not obvious) ordering, we should make it obvious (e.g., if it's by-last-message, put "last message X minutes ago" next to each entry or whatever).
If they don't have a meaningful ordering, using alphabetical seems reasonable, possibly with the "you on top" and/or "admins on top" rules.
(After T6868, it might also make sense to put "away" users on the bottom, but I don't actually think this is very good and T6868 is probably a long way away.)
Comment Actions
The existing order is based on when participants are added. (I think anyway; the query is on conpherence phid and the index used is (conpherence phid, participant phid) so I think it ends up ordered by id? Seems like that on my test data.)
Ergo, go with the "I am at the top, rest of the list is alphabetical" option. Diff in a moment.