Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] gitweb: Optional grouping of projects by category
From: Jakub Narebski <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:45:45
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008, Sébastien Cevey wrote:
At Fri, 12 Dec 2008 03:03:55 +0100, Jakub Narebski wrote:quoted
And no, we don't need to sort by categories first. Let me explain in more detail a bit.Thanks for the detailed explanation, I understand your preference. But as you said, it's a bit arbitrary, I think none is completely obvious.
First, I feel a bit bad for derailing this patch. Currently gitweb does not do pagination of projects list; it is not even possible in a sane way with current way project searching/selecting is implemented. So the whole build_projlist_by_category() respecting $from and $to is moot point. So if we don't use it, even if it is nice to have for the future, we don't need to pay cost of extra stable sorting.
I don't really have a strong opinion about which is best, but just to illustrate what made me go for the solution B, let me show another example: name / date / cat 1 2006 A 2 2003 B 3 2005 B 4 2003 A 5 2000 A 6 2008 C 7 2007 C 8 2001 B 9 2005 A We then sort by name and split in pages of N=3 (sorted by cat on each page): A:sort(name) split(max=3) subsort(cat) 1 2006 A 4 2003 A 9 2005 A 2 2003 B 5 2000 A 8 2001 B 3 2005 B 6 2008 C 7 2007 C B:sort(cat) subsort(name) split(max=3) 1 2006 A 9 2005 A 8 2001 B 4 2003 A 2 2003 B 6 2008 C 5 2000 A 3 2005 B 7 2007 C With B, we have the second top-entry (2) relegated to the second page, which might be surprising because we ordered by name. But what I find weird about A is that because of the per-page category sorting, the "top-sorted entries at the top" isn't true either (page 3). We have "reshuffled" the result of 'sort(name) split(max=3)' on each page.
[...]
It's perhaps even more apparent if we sort by date: A:sort(year) split(max=3) subsort(cat) 1 2006 A 9 2005 A 4 2003 A 6 2008 C 3 2005 B 5 2000 A 7 2007 C 2 2003 B 8 2001 B B:sort(cat) subsort(year) split(max=4) 1 2006 A 4 2003 A 3 2005 B 9 2005 A 8 2001 B 7 2007 C 5 2000 A 2 2003 B 6 2008 C It feels kind of unnatural that not only projects are not sorted by date on each page (they are inside categories), but moreover categories are spread over all pages. I guess it depends on your use case, and whether categories are important or known by the user. I personally don't really care (I never split stuff into pages in the gitweb I use), so I can do a new version of my patch that does A if you prefer, just let me know. I just wanted to clarify that both solutions sort of suck :-)
Well, with version A you can (I think) simply change
foreach my $cat (sort keys %categories) {
to
foreach my $cat (sort
{ cmp_cat($projlist, \%categories, $oi, $a, $b) } keys %categories) {
to have the following output (see the difference on page 3)
A':sort(name) split(max=3) subsort(sort(cat,name))
1 2006 A 4 2003 A 7 2007 C
2 2003 B 5 2000 A 8 2001 B
3 2005 B 6 2008 C 9 2005 A
where sort_cat might be something like (we took advantage that
categories in %categories have at least one project):
sub cmp_cat {
my ($projlist, $cats, $oi, $a, $b) = @_;
my ($aa, $bb);
# projects in categories are sorted, so we can compare first
# project from a category to sort categories in given ordering
$aa = $projlist->{$cats->{$a}[0]};
$bb = $projlist->{$cats->{$b}[0]};
if ($oi->{'type'} eq 'str') {
return $aa->{$oi->{'key'}} cmp $bb->{$oi->{'key'}};
} else {
return $aa->{$oi->{'key'}} <=> $bb->{$oi->{'key'}};
}
}
--
Jakub Narebski
Poland