View Issue Details
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0011327||mantisbt||reports||public||2010-01-05 10:30||2018-02-06 21:17|
|Target Version||2.11.0||Fixed in Version||2.11.0|
|Summary||0011327: "Developer By Resolution" is the only box in the Summary page not ordered (at least it doesn't seem to be any logic behind it)|
The "Developer By Resolution" box in the Summary page seems to have no logic of ordering developers. If there is a logic, it's not related to any of the relevant columns. For a while I suspected it's in the order of devs joining the project, but it's not even that: the last dev that joined appears somewhere in the middle of the list. Also Access Level doesn't seem to play a role in the order.<br />
|Tags||No tags attached.|
Same thing for the Developer Stats box, which seems to be ordered based on the same criteria.
EDIT: Small correction to my report above - it seems there is a logic, namely the order the user accounts were created. This was misleading for me, because one of these users started as reporter, but was appointed as developer only months later. So I expected him to appear at the bottom of the list, while he appeared in the middle of it (as per date/time of his account creation).
I guess this logic can be kept for the Developer Stats box, but I believe it should still be changed for Developer By Resolution. If the name says "By Resolution", the hierarchy in that box should say something about the dev's efficiency or amount of workload assigned. So ordering by the number of fixed or open reports assigned to him/her would make more sense IMO.
According to the SQL query in the source code, it's sorted by handler_id (user id), so it's not exactly the order of devs joining the project, but rather that of users registration, as you pointed out in 0011327:0024048.
Implementing a more complex sort as you suggest does not really make sense at this time, because I think this page is long overdue for a major overhaul.
For consistency with the Reporters by resolution report, I think this should be sorted by total number of issues (descending).