Make transaction list sortable by cleared status

[jaarasys-henria]

Make transactions list sortable by cleared status. Makes cleared status column behave like any other column that it makes sense to sort by. Simple implementation with no negatives to mention. Unless you count the new header text taking up a little more horizontal screen space than the empty header it replaces as a downside.

I tried testing with different screen sizes and ratios in Mozilla Firefox and behavior looked sane to me.

Let me know if there's something I can do to enhance my suggested feature and I'll get it done. I hope I could properly deduce a correct implementation from the surrounding code. React is not my forte :)

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for actualbudget ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	eb2dbcd
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/actualbudget/deploys/65bd162d6fa029000864cf11
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-1994.demo.actualbudget.org/
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[youngcw]

can you use just a "C" or "R" instead of "Cleared" that would not create as much empty space

[jaarasys-henria]

can you use just a "C" or "R" instead of "Cleared" that would not create as much empty space

Fair point. I actually considered and tried it, but didn't really like it. It felt a bit unclear IMO. Old YNAB4 has a nice, stylized 'C' letter. Maybe I could retry what you suggested, but with some added styling/formatting to make it look more like a symbol for something instead of just looking like a stray letter up there in the column header. That might sway me to love it.

[youngcw]

Something as simple as an italicized letter could make it not feel like a bug

[jaarasys-henria]

Something as simple as an italicized letter could make it not feel like a bug

I'll see what I can come up with! :)

[shall0pass]

Another thought. Could the button default to the down position? Normally when I sort by cleared status, I'm looking for the uncleared items. Currently I need to click twice to bring those to the top. I know it doesn't follow the default behavior of the other columns, but it seems like to me it would be more expected. Thoughts?

[jaarasys-henria]

Another thought. Could the button default to the down position? Normally when I sort by cleared status, I'm looking for the uncleared items. Currently I need to click twice to bring those to the top. I know it doesn't follow the default behavior of the other columns, but it seems like to me it would be more expected. Thoughts?

Fair point. I fiddled with both options, but by some already forgotten fuzzy gut feeling logic, landed on this one. I have no strong feelings one way or the other, so might just as well change it.

[jaarasys-henria]

Feedback acknowledged and implemented.

• Needlessly long 'cleared' text is now just a '✓', which I feel strikes a nice balance between aesthetics and ease of implementation. I gave it some five px of wiggle room compared to the old values. I read React-stuff from the interwebz and came up with all kinds of convoluted schemes of passing styling via props, but then realized simple things are often the best, removed all of them and leave ya'll with this simple change :)
• sort order now starts as ascending with falsey checkmarks first.

[youngcw]

I like that better

[youngcw]

Can you look into why the tests are failing?

[jaarasys-henria]

Can you look into why the tests are failing?

Could there be some issue with PRs from forked repos and the workflow?

I just synced my PR to see how it goes this time, but same result. The Wait for PR build to succeed doesn't seem to detect a successful Netflify build of the PR, even though Netlify deployment logs don't seem to indicate any issue with the build step. It seems like it should succeed

It doesn't mark the 'wait for PR build' step as a failure though, even if it times out. Instead it lets the next step run and then we get an error with no matching workflow run found with any artifacts. For some reason it can't grab the build-stats build artifact. Netlify logs look like it should get created properly and then uploaded at the end of build.yml .

I wonder why this could be, since the build clearly succeeds and the live preview is online. Based on the deployment log lines here there should be something there for the next stage to enjoy.

This commit seems to touch stuff around those parts.

With no access to testing the Netlify API response and other related things, I'm not sure what's going on. Any clues where to look next?

[youngcw]

At least half of our PRs come from forks, so I doubt its because of that.
@MatissJanis Any idea why the tests are failing?

[github-actions]

Bundle Stats — desktop-client

Hey there, this message comes from a GitHub action that helps you and reviewers to understand how these changes affect the size of this project's bundle.

As this PR is updated, I'll keep you updated on how the bundle size is impacted.

Total

Files count	Total bundle size	% Changed
10	4.98 MB → 4.98 MB (+1.24 kB)	+0.02%

Changeset

File	Δ	Size
src/components/accounts/Account.jsx	📈 +1.02 kB (+2.61%)	39.04 kB → 40.06 kB
src/components/transactions/TransactionsTable.jsx	📈 +228 B (+0.40%)	55.14 kB → 55.36 kB

View detailed bundle breakdown

Added

No assets were added

Removed

No assets were removed

Bigger

Asset	File Size	% Changed
static/js/wide.js	239.9 kB → 241.14 kB (+1.24 kB)	+0.52%

Smaller

No assets were smaller

Unchanged

Asset	File Size	% Changed
static/js/resize-observer.js	18.37 kB	0%
static/js/indexeddb-main-thread-worker-e59fee74.js	13.5 kB	0%
static/js/BackgroundImage.js	122.29 kB	0%
static/js/ButtonLink.js	379 B	0%
static/js/BalanceTooltip.js	6.06 kB	0%
static/js/FiltersMenu.js	28.92 kB	0%
static/js/narrow.js	80.18 kB	0%
static/js/ReportRouter.js	1.84 MB	0%
static/js/index.js	2.64 MB	0%

[github-actions]

Bundle Stats — loot-core

Hey there, this message comes from a GitHub action that helps you and reviewers to understand how these changes affect the size of this project's bundle.

As this PR is updated, I'll keep you updated on how the bundle size is impacted.

Total

Files count	Total bundle size	% Changed
1	1.18 MB	0%

Changeset

No files were changed

View detailed bundle breakdown

Added

No assets were added

Removed

No assets were removed

Bigger

No assets were bigger

Smaller

No assets were smaller

Unchanged

Asset	File Size	% Changed
kcab.worker.js	1.18 MB	0%

[MatissJanis]

@youngcw as a maintainer you'll want to manually trigger CI jobs for folks that are first-time contributors in Github. And then also retry the bundle size comparison job.

[youngcw]

Looks like its just the VRT that needs updated. The steps to update the snapshots is here https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/blob/master/packages/desktop-client/README.md#visual-regression

[jaarasys-henria]

I think I did see something about approving some workflow stage somewhere and it almost rang a bell. But just almost. Cheers for pitching in @MatissJanis! Nice to see this moving forward.

I'll look into the VRT thing later.

[Jackenmen]

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that this seems to ignore whether the cleared status is in "locked" state and treats it as cleared:

[github-actions]

This PR is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 5 days.

[jaarasys-henria]

@Jackenmen I'll look into it! Sry for the silence. Been quite a busy period.

[jaarasys-henria]

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that this seems to ignore whether the cleared status is in "locked" state and treats it as cleared.

Is this more to your liking, @Jackenmen?

Also, it looks like someone has to push the magic button for the size comparison check like @youngcw or @MatissJanis did earlier.

[Jackenmen]

I'm not going to look at the code but the deploy preview works as I would expect it to, yeah!

[youngcw]

Nice

[youngcw]

I think my only concern at this point is that the column headers are not slightly misaligned from the data with the addition of the check mark.

[jaarasys-henria]

I see what you mean. I'll take a look at the alignments tomorrow.

…

-------- Original Message --------

On 1 Feb 2024, 22.21, youngcw wrote: I think my only concern at this point is that the column headers are not slightly misaligned from the data with the addition of the check mark. — Reply to this email directly, [view it on GitHub](#1994 (comment)), or [unsubscribe](https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BEFGJENAWRVJK4IFCDKTDPTYRP2L5AVCNFSM6AAAAAA774T7KGVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSMRSGE3DSNBTG4). You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[jaarasys-henria]

I think my only concern at this point is that the column headers are not slightly misaligned from the data with the addition of the check mark.

This is now addressed as well 👍

[youngcw]

Looks good. Thanks!