| Summary: | Target Milestones created with same sort order key.. | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Community | Reporter: | Raghunathan Srinivasan <raghunathan.srinivasan> |
| Component: | CommitterTools | Assignee: | Eclipse Webmaster <webmaster> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | P3 | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | PC | ||
| OS: | Windows XP | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
|
Description
Raghunathan Srinivasan
Is there a way to fix the sort order key to the following: 3.3 33000 3.3 M1 33001 3.3 M2 33002 3.3 M3 33003 3.3 M4 33004 4.0 40000 Future 99999 The sort key is a signed int, so all of the values you're asking for are out of range(+/-32767) -M. (In reply to comment #2) > The sort key is a signed int, so all of the values you're asking for are out of > range(+/-32767) > > -M. Is there a mechanism to fix this so that I have room to create project milestones that will appear properly sorted? > Is there a mechanism to fix this so that I have room to create project
> milestones that will appear properly sorted?
There is no mechanism per se, but with a bit of wizardry, I've done just that. Here is the new list:
+------------+---------+
| value | sortkey |
+------------+---------+
| --- | 200 |
| 1.5 M4 | 400 |
| 1.5 M5 | 600 |
| 1.5 M6 | 800 |
| 1.5 RC | 1000 |
| 1.5 RC4 | 1200 |
| 1.5 RC5 | 1400 |
| 1.5 RC6 | 1600 |
| 1.5.1 M1 | 1800 |
| 2.0 | 2000 |
| 2.0 M3 | 2200 |
| 2.0 M4 | 2400 |
| 2.0 M5 | 2600 |
| 2.0 M6 | 2800 |
| 2.0 RC0 | 3000 |
| 2.0 RC1 | 3200 |
| 2.0 RC2 | 3400 |
| 2.0 RC3 | 3600 |
| 2.0 RC4 | 3800 |
| 2.0.1 M201 | 4000 |
| 2.0.2 M202 | 4200 |
| 2.0.2 P | 4400 |
| 3.0 | 4600 |
| 3.0 M1 | 4800 |
| 3.0 M2 | 5000 |
| 3.0 M3 | 5200 |
| 3.0 M4 | 5400 |
| 3.0 M5 | 5600 |
| 3.0 M6 | 5800 |
| 3.0 M7 | 6000 |
| 3.0 P | 6200 |
| 3.0 RC1 | 6400 |
| 3.0 RC2 | 6600 |
| 3.0 RC3 | 6800 |
| 3.0 RC4 | 7000 |
| 3.0.1 | 7200 |
| 3.0.1 RC1 | 7400 |
| 3.0.1 RC2 | 7600 |
| 3.0.2 | 7800 |
| 3.0.2 RC1 | 8000 |
| 3.0.2 RC2 | 8200 |
| 3.0.3 | 8400 |
| 3.0.3 RC1 | 8600 |
| 3.0.3 RC2 | 8800 |
| 3.0.4 | 9000 |
| 3.0.5 | 9200 |
| 3.0.5 P | 9400 |
| 3.1 | 9600 |
| 3.1 M2 | 9800 |
| 3.1 M3 | 10000 |
| 3.1 M4 | 10200 |
| 3.1 M5 | 10400 |
| 3.1 M6 | 10600 |
| 3.1 M7 | 10800 |
| 3.1 RC1 | 11000 |
| 3.1 RC2 | 11200 |
| 3.1 RC3 | 11400 |
| 3.1 RC4 | 11600 |
| 3.1 RC5 | 11800 |
| 3.1.1 | 12000 |
| 3.1.2 | 12200 |
| 3.1.2 P | 12400 |
| 3.1M1 | 12600 |
| 3.2 | 12800 |
| 3.2 M1 | 13000 |
| 3.2 M2 | 13200 |
| 3.2 M3 | 13400 |
| 3.2 M4 | 13600 |
| 3.2 M5 | 13800 |
| 3.2 M6 | 14000 |
| 3.2 M7 | 14200 |
| 3.2 RC1 | 14400 |
| 3.2 RC2 | 14600 |
| 3.2 RC3 | 14800 |
| 3.2 RC4 | 15000 |
| 3.2.1 | 15200 |
| 3.2.2 | 15400 |
| 3.2.3 | 15600 |
| 3.3 | 15800 |
| 3.3 M1 | 16000 |
| 3.3 M2 | 16200 |
| 3.3 M3 | 16400 |
| 3.3 M4 | 16600 |
| 4.0 | 16800 |
| Future | 17000 |
+------------+---------+
I'd suggest changing "Future" to 1 or something similar.
Thanks for using your wizard skills. I now have some room to breathe! In case anyone cares, here's what I did: sql> create temporary table _milestones as select @rownum:=@rownum+1 as rownum, m.id from milestones as m, (SELECT @rownum:=0) r where product_id = 46; sql> select rownum*100, id from _milestones; /* just to test .. change 100 to a decent multiplier */ sql> update milestones, _milestones set milestones.sortkey = (_milestones.rownum * 100) where milestones.id = _milestones.id |