---- Reported by shotwell-maint@gnome.bugs 2010-10-25 13:46:00 -0700 ----

Original Redmine bug id: 2728
Original URL: http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/2728
Searchable id: yorba-bug-2728
Original author: Vera Yin
Original description:

Reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/source/shotwell/bug/665602

I have a collection of photos (about 6000), and I've noticed that the outcome
of sorting depends on what sorting was selected before, and the sorting isn't
functioning correctly in general.

Most of the time I want the photos to be sorted by date, but few of them are
not set to correct positions and plaed to the very end of the list.

But if I first choose to sort photos by rating (no photos have ratings btw),
and then by datethey seem to be at correct positions.

I believe the sorting algorithm should be revised.



---- Additional Comments From shotwell-maint@gnome.bugs 2013-05-01 11:47:00 -0700 ----

### History

####

#1

Updated by Adam Dingle almost 3 years ago

  * **Target version** set to _0.9_

####

#2

Updated by Adam Dingle almost 3 years ago

This was also reported recently on the Shotwell mailing list:

http://lists.yorba.org/pipermail/shotwell/2011-January/001665.html

####

#3

Updated by Adam Dingle almost 3 years ago

In the current trunk, I'm not able to reproduce this problem as described
athttps://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/source/shotwell/bug/665602using the test
database posted there.

Jim, you posted on that ticket saying you could reproduce the problem. Do you
still see it with the current trunk?

####

#4

Updated by Adam Dingle almost 3 years ago

  * **Subject** changed from _Incorrect sorting of photos_ to _[norepro] Incorrect sorting of photos_

####

#5

Updated by Adam Dingle almost 3 years ago

  * **Status** changed from _Open_ to _5_
  * **Resolution** set to _duplicate_
  * **% Done** changed from _0_ to _100_

On the downstream bug it's apparent that some dates involved are before 1969.
Shotwell is known not to work with such dates – see#3040. So I'm going to
mark this as a duplicate of that bug.

####

#6

Updated by Adam Dingle over 2 years ago

  * **Status** changed from _5_ to _4_
  * **Resolution** deleted (<strike>_duplicate_</strike>)
  * **% Done** changed from _100_ to _0_
  * **Target version** changed from _0.9_ to _0.10_
  * **Subject** changed from _[norepro] Incorrect sorting of photos_ to _Incorrect sorting of photos_

A user downstream has said they're seeing this with no dates prior to 2004. So
maybe this isn't the same as#3040after all, and maybe with that user's help we
can finally get a reproducible case. Reopening.

####

#7

Updated by Johan - over 2 years ago

Replying to [comment:5 adam]:

> In the current trunk, I'm not able to reproduce this problem as described
athttps://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/source/shotwell/bug/665602using the test
database posted there.

> > Jim, you posted on that ticket saying you could reproduce the problem. Do
you still see it with the current trunk?

Possibly caused by several files having the same timestamp (don't know if
seconds are truncated internally, but iirc they don't show in photo
properties), in which case photo ordering is affected by previous sorting
order.

For me it would be best if sorting was done by file name in case timestamp
equals, as this would get them right.

####

#8

Updated by Eric Gregory over 2 years ago

Could this be a duplicate of ticket #3539?

####

#9

Updated by Eric Gregory over 2 years ago

  * **Assignee** changed from _Anonymous_ to _Eric Gregory_

I can still reproduce this with the provided photos/db on Launchpad.
Investigating…

####

#10

Updated by Eric Gregory over 2 years ago

The reproduction has to do with the fact that three of the photos are pre-
epoch. Remove those photos, and the others sort correctly.

We'll wait and see if the downstream user who reports the issue with new
photos has a reproduction for us.

####

#11

Updated by Eric Gregory over 2 years ago

  * **Resolution** set to _worksforme_
  * **% Done** changed from _0_ to _0_

Could not reproduce in trunk with Nattgew's sample data on Launchpad, but
could repro in 0.9.2. Going to mark this one as worksforme.

####

#12

Updated by Charles Lindsay 7 months ago

  * **Status** changed from _5_ to _Invalid_



--- Bug imported by chaz@yorba.org 2013-11-25 21:47 UTC  ---

This bug was previously known as _bug_ 2728 at http://redmine.yorba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2728

Unknown Component 
   Using default product and component set in Parameters 
Unknown milestone "unknown in product shotwell. 
   Setting to default milestone for this product, "---".
Setting qa contact to the default for this product.
   This bug either had no qa contact or an invalid one.