fix: Sort by "last modified" (issue #5158)#5265
Open
v3DJG6GL wants to merge 20 commits intonextcloud:mainfrom
Open
fix: Sort by "last modified" (issue #5158)#5265v3DJG6GL wants to merge 20 commits intonextcloud:mainfrom
v3DJG6GL wants to merge 20 commits intonextcloud:mainfrom
Conversation
…ast-modified sorting Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
…imitives at storage time Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
…change detection Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
…ore primitives Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
…o prevent fake timestamps Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
…q, curly braces) Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
…le malformed dates Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
…ed dates Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
…rmalization Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
…act, skipSort?} Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: v3DJG6GL <72495210+v3DJG6GL@users.noreply.github.com>
e72a0aa to
1e5e15c
Compare
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Fix #5158
With sort order set to Last modified:
Underlying issue: sorting crashed whenever any contact had a missing or malformed
REV(last-modified) value:The code called a date method on every contact's
REV. IfREVwas missing or not a valid date, it threw an error.Changes
nullif it's missing/unreadable).REVsort to the end instead of crashing the list.revgetter returnnullon error instead of throwing, so one contact with a brokenREVcan't crash the component that reads it.REV = nowwhen one is missing (both in theContactconstructor and in a background auto-"fix"). The old behavior made contacts jump to the top every time they were touched.REVdoesn't change just because it was viewed.LLM Disclosure
Developed with assistance from Claude Code (Opus 4.7, 1M context).
The LLM helped me identify the related files, code parts and proposed possible code modifications and fixes.
I've manually reviewed, the code the best I could.
A proper code review is required in any case...