Awesome - Do you think it should be
Public 0
Guest 1

You currently have it the otherway around

Do you think it should be Public 0 Guest 1

Oh yes you're right. Edited! ;-)

Awesome - thanks

On 28 January 2015 at 16:55, Cyril Rezé notifications@github.com wrote:

Do you think it should be Public 0 Guest 1

Oh yes you're right. Edited! ;-)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5899 (comment).

Brian Teeman
Co-founder Joomla! and OpenSourceMatters Inc.
http://brian.teeman.net/

With this change how does the ordering look for existing sites. Is it now completely random?

With this change how does the ordering look for existing sites. Is it now completely random?

There will be no change in filter and access type dropdown. (as order by ordering ASC first, and after ordering by Title ASC).
So, for someone who has never changed ordering of access levels, it will change only in access levels view.
But, if someone has already changed ordering of access levels, to have the order he wanted in the filter or access field input, it won't change nothing! (this is why ordering should not be updated for already existing sites, to prevent to break user own ordering).

So, the only change in Access levels view, will be for someone who has never changed access ordering.
In all cases, no changes after update for already existing sites in filter and access type field.

It was before completely random where we really select access : filter and access type field. ;-)
On a fresh install, ordering will be logical by default everywhere, and customizable.
On an update, ordering will have to be set depending of user needs.

To keep before-update order in access levels, is it possible to add a second ordering to parent::populateState ?

Works with mysql, postgresql, mssql except when you install with the following data:

• mysql: sample_learn.sql
• postgresql: sample_learn.sql
• mssql: sample_learn.sql and sample_testing.sql

@waader Thank you!
I didn't think of samples...

I have added ordering, but just a question about 'Customer Access Level (Example)' order.
I have ordered like this :

0 Public
1 Guest
2 Registered
3 Customer Access Level (Example)
4 Special
5 Super Users

Before, Customer Access Level was ordered after Special... was it an error ? Seems to me more logicial if Special is after Customer Access Level (Example)... ?

Cyril

Looks good to me

On 29 January 2015 at 12:08, Cyril Rezé notifications@github.com wrote:

@waader https://github.com/waader Thank you! [image: ]
I didn't think of samples...

I have added ordering, but just a question about 'Customer Access Level
(Example)' order.
I have ordering like this :

0 Public
1 Guest
2 Registered
3 Customer Access Level (Example)
4 Special
5 Super Users

Before, Customer Access Level was ordered after Special... was it an error
? Seems to me more logicial if Special is after Customer Access Level
(Example)... ?

Cyril

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5899 (comment).

Brian Teeman
Co-founder Joomla! and OpenSourceMatters Inc.
http://brian.teeman.net/

@test ok (mysql)

@test works for mysql, postgresql, mssql! Thanks!

Multiple tests RTC