That might be true, but the disc number field is not visible by default. If it were visible by default and I could see that my single album was incorrectly tagged with two different disc numbers, that would be one thing, because it would be obvious why it was sorted that way. But since it's not visible, I was completely confused and assumed it was a bug, because assuming Banshee also sorts by disc number when I ask it to only sort by track number doesn't make sense to me.
I guess what I'm saying is that if you're going to sort by something, you can't make it a hidden field, because that will lead to confusion for mis-tagged albums like mine. (I'm usually very particular about how I tag my music, but most people aren't as thorough as me). If you want to also sort by disc number when the user asks to only sort by track number, then at least show the other field you're sorting by. So it's not so much a bug as a usability problem I think.
That might be true, but the disc number field is not visible by default. If it were visible by default and I could see that my single album was incorrectly tagged with two different disc numbers, that would be one thing, because it would be obvious why it was sorted that way. But since it's not visible, I was completely confused and assumed it was a bug, because assuming Banshee also sorts by disc number when I ask it to only sort by track number doesn't make sense to me.
I guess what I'm saying is that if you're going to sort by something, you can't make it a hidden field, because that will lead to confusion for mis-tagged albums like mine. (I'm usually very particular about how I tag my music, but most people aren't as thorough as me). If you want to also sort by disc number when the user asks to only sort by track number, then at least show the other field you're sorting by. So it's not so much a bug as a usability problem I think.