#8320 closed enhancement (duplicate)
Would like second level order by clause in query module (Custom Query)
| Reported by: | Owned by: | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | normal | Milestone: | |
| Component: | report system | Version: | 0.11.3 |
| Severity: | minor | Keywords: | |
| Cc: | mpotter@… | Branch: | |
| Release Notes: | |||
| API Changes: | |||
| Internal Changes: | |||
Description
The only reason I need to use the existing reports (which I see is wanting to go away) is because the Custom Query doesn't seem to allow multiple order= clauses which are applied sequentially. E.g.,
query:?status=accepted & status=assigned & status=new & status=reopened & group=milestone & order=owner & order=priority
or perhaps
query:?status=accepted & status=assigned & status=new & status=reopened & group=milestone & order=owner, priority
something that will allow you to group by milestone, then first sort by owner and then by priority within owner.
Attachments (0)
Change History (2)
comment:1 by , 15 years ago
| Milestone: | 0.11.5 |
|---|---|
| Resolution: | → duplicate |
| Status: | new → closed |
comment:2 by , 14 years ago
| Cc: | added |
|---|
Replying to bitpond@…:
status=assigned & status=new & status=reopened ... order=owner, prioritysomething that will allow you to group by milestone, then first sort by owner and then by priority within owner.
This syntax ignores the reverse ordering, which is currently encoded using desc.
desc=1 & order=id
Might I suggest following the model used by status in your example where multiple values can be given, however with the case of order and desc, the order in which they appear matters.
order=owner & desc=1 & order=priority & order=id
Thus sorted by owner, then by reverse priority, then by id. Alternately a new orderrev tag could be introduced, but that my cause a backward comparability issue.
Duplicate of #4644.