I need the option of trac.ini for the displayed order of roadmap.

[tdkim@…]

The changeset [2758] is a great work.

But my project has serveral types of Milestone(by name).

OutputForModel1_v0.1
OutputForModel1_v0.2
OutputForModel2_v0.1
OutputForModel2_v0.2
OutputForModel2_v0.3

So I need the option of trac.ini like this.

OrderTypeOfRoadMap = [date|name]

[cmlenz]

Instead of proposing an implementation, can you please state

1. what ordering you are getting, and
2. what ordering you would have wanted

What is the due date of these milestones?

[tdkim@…]

Sorry. My posting is not enough.

My trac repo has several types of milestone.

For example
I have two model, ModelA and ModelB.
Before [2758], The roadmap of my project is displayed

ModelA_v0.1  2005/01/01(due or completed date)
ModelA_v0.2  2005/05/05
ModelA_v0.3  2005/06/06
ModelB_v0.2  2005/02/02
ModelB_v0.3  2005/03/03
ModelB_v0.4  2005/04/04

After [2758], The roadmap of my project is diaplayed

ModelA_v0.1  2005/01/01(due or completed date)
ModelB_v0.2  2005/02/02
ModelB_v0.3  2005/03/03
ModelB_v0.4  2005/04/04
ModelA_v0.2  2005/05/05
ModelA_v0.3  2005/06/06

I think that almost projects need the ordering by date, But some projects needs the ordering by name.

So I propose the option(OrderingBy...) in trac.ini.

[cmlenz]

No enhancement requests for the maintenance branch.

I wonder what ModelA and ModelB actually refers to in this example. Are those separate projects of sorts? How are you using milestones?

I'm asking because I think that a name-vs-duedate ordering option is maybe not the right approach to solve this problem It might work in your case, but I'd really like to get a better understanding of the problem.

[tdkim@…]

Thanks for reply.

My repository has two source tree, ModelA and ModelB.

/--- trunk --- ModelA -- source...
           +- ModelB -- source...
  +- tags --- ModelA_0.1
           +- ModelA_... 0.2 0.3 ...
           +- ModelB_0.1
           +- ModelB_... 0.2 0.3 ...

The ModelA and ModelB have each milestones. ModelA is similar to ModelB, but not exactly.

I know that the structure of repository and source is bad. But I can't fix or change the structure.

The ordering by duedate is correct. But in my case, The ordering by duedate makes me be confused. (It is my fault.)

[cboos]

This will possibly be obsoleted by multi-project support (#130).

[mgood]

Replying to cboos:

This will possibly be obsoleted by multi-project support (#130).

I agree that the multi-project support will handle this more cleanly. So, doesn't that mean that we can close this ticket as wontfix since we will not be using the approach described here?