Bug 836950

Summary:	matrix report inconsistent column ordering
Product:	[Retired] Beaker	Reporter:	Ales Zelinka <azelinka>
Component:	web UI	Assignee:	beaker-dev-list
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	0.9	CC:	bpeck, jingwang, mastyk, stl, tools-bugs
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	Triaged
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:	UX
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2020-06-02 11:59:30 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Ales Zelinka 2012-07-02 09:57:02 UTC

Description of problem:
See this report:

https://beaker.engineering.redhat.com/matrix/?toggle_nacks_on=on&job_ids=255568+255509+255508+255543+255542+255545

The order of old/new columns differ from architecture to architecture. Could beaker enforce the same order for all columns? Preferably old left, new right - that's what we're use to.

Thanks

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
0.9

Comment 1 Ales Zelinka 2012-09-21 11:50:51 UTC

Sorting the columns in an alphabetical order would be best (and simple to implement, I presume).

Check this (one heck of a) matrix report:
https://beaker.engineering.redhat.com/matrix/?toggle_nacks_on=on&job_ids=302238+302239

Currently the columns are (from left to right):
3 - AS - old
4 - AS - old
5.3.ll - Server - old
...
...
3 - AS - new
4 - AS - new
5.3.ll - Server - new
...
...

Expected results:

3 - AS - old
3 - AS - new
4 - AS - old
4 - AS - new
5.3.ll - Server - old
5.3.ll - Server - new
...
...

This way both old and new results from one particular RHEL version are next to each other - checking for regressions is easy.

Comment 2 Raymond Mancy 2012-09-23 23:05:16 UTC

Alphabetical order would be simplest and easiest I'd think, but then you would end up with '10.x.y' coming before '5.3.ll' for example. So we probably want to do numerical + alphabetical sorting, I'm assuming that would be preferrable ?

Comment 3 Ales Zelinka 2012-09-24 10:17:13 UTC

yes, you're right (Also lately I have been studying this alphabet thing; it turns out that 'o' comes after 'n'. Which will mean, contrary to my previous comment, that when sorted alphabetically new jobs will come before old ones. But that's just a very minor inconvenience and I'm ok with it).

Comment 5 Martin Styk 2020-06-02 11:59:30 UTC

Hello,

thank you for opening issue in Beaker project.
This issue was marked with component "web ui".
As we are not planning to address any further issues in current UI, due to technical stack and not being able to work with Python 3 codebase, I'm closing this issue as WONTFIX.
New UI will be reimplemented within new versions of Beaker.

If you have any questions feel free to reach out to me.

Best regards,
Martin <martin.styk>