Order by "age" does not work for bugs

[Thomas Bechtold]

The order by age does not seems to work for bugs. See attached screenshot.

[Laura Czajkowski (czajkowski)]

@Matthew Revell can you please comment on this behaviour with regards to columns, I can confirm the sort by age is not working as it is taking into account a bug that is linked to another bug and this is the age that is showing up.

[Matthew Revell (matthew.revell)]

The bug age displayed for each bug in the listing does seem to match up with the bug number. For example, a bug that's showing as two years old has a bug number starting 390, whereas a one year old bug starts 661 and an even more recent bug starts with 880.

So, I'd assume the bug age displayed is correct: i.e. the bug report itself is the age displayed.

My hunch is that the list is actually ordered by the date that the bug was marked as affecting the network-manager project.

A solution to this would be to have two separate items: the age since the bug itself was created and the age since that bug was marked as affecting your project.

We'll be making some updates to the new bug listings style soon and I'll aim to have this disparity fixed as part of that work.

[Deryck Hodge (deryck)]

This is due to confusion over bug age vs. task age. However, the screenshot is showing that we're not actually sorting them on bug age. The 'X days old' and bug numbers lower down the list are younger bugs than the 1 and 2 years old bugs just above them. I haven't looked yet, but I would guess we're doing a bug task age sort here and calling it bug age.

I thought we had agreed on doing an actual bug age sort but there was some debate around this, so maybe we went with bug task age sort and didn't update the UI. Or maybe I just misunderstood the issues around this in the earlier discussion.

[Robert Collins (lifeless)]

I suspect this is indeed a dupe of the earlier bug discussion, which IIRC was closed wontfix.