[TYPO3-core] FYI24 #12025: Make statuses in the status report sort alphabetical

[Ernesto Baschny [cron IT]]

Ingo Renner schrieb:

> Hi Ernesto,
> 
>> you posted a FYI when I think this should have been a RFC.
> 
> I chose to go with an FYI as I'm the original developer of the sysext,
> thus I should know best what's going on with it and where to change
> things. The same does apply to rtehtmlarea, felogin, dbal, and
> scheduler, doesn't it?
> Second, I talked to Olly already and got his ok to go with a FYI24.
> 
>> We (at least me) are not demanding anything from you, we are just
>> commenting on your patch.
> 
> What's a "do it different than you propose" then?

Quoting:

- Steffen: "It would nmake sense to order by severity, or group by
owner, or grouping like Ernesto suggested. "

- Francois: ".. grouping by category would be far more helpful. I think
we should really consider this now, ..."

- Xavier: "Ordering alphabetically makes sense when grouping is in place
because grouping is much more useful than any ordering you would apply
prior to that."

- myself: "But I also agree with Xavier that grouping is more important
than sorting."

We all agreed, and we all stated "we should be doing it this way", noone
told you do it. We only agreed that your change is not good and should
not be commited. Maybe there are others "silent watchers" that agree
with you (Oli?), but noone has yet done that.

>> In this particular case, sorting
>> alphabetically is worse than what we have now (which is not bad at all).
> 
> Well, first people complain about the list not being structured, now
> they complain about a straight forward alphabetical sorting, what know?

Maybe you should read the reasoning of the people. Who came up with the
idea of alphabetical list? Why do you think it will help? You have no
supporters for that idea besides yourself.

>> A better idea would be categorization, which several person already
>> stated. If you don't want to do it, don't feel obliged to do so.
> 
> To me that's demanding something again, aren't you demanding
> categorization here?

I can only "demand" together with a group of people that certain stuff
isn't commited to the core (by means of -1 or "common sense"). And this
was the only "demand" we made.

The idea of categorization was born as a better approach at the same
time. Nobody demanded you to do anything. Just stand by and do nothing
if you have no interest in doing it, you might even "-1" it if someone
else comes up with a RFC where this is implemented.

Reports is a very good adition and we thank you for that. But it is not
in the core and certain rules apply.

> I actually do see a point in categorization, but I also see
> disadvantages with it - especially not being able to simply copy&paste
> the whole table to a bug report or support email (from a customer to a
> agency f.e.) at once. Thus I'm not in favor of categorization yet.

I cannot see the problem with copy&paste if the table is categorized. I
could as well use that as an argument against the alphabetical order: if
a customer copy&pastes the reports list and send it to me, I will always
want to see the used TYPO3 version in the first line and not somewhere
way down below in between other extensions non-important report lines.

> Anyways, if you want that change, come up with a patch, but please don't
> block others because of your demands which you aren't willing to
> contribute to yourself.

Reviewing and commenting and giving ideas is as valuable as the code itself.

In my eyes the code is good as it is right now (messages are displayed
in the order "first come, first serve"), it would get worse with
alphabetical ordering and it would get better with a categorization. So
this is my motivation for the -1 on your change but still not a
commitment to provide any other patch (lack of time) and certainly not a
demand for you to do anything (besides not commiting). :)

Cheers,
Ernesto