Sort by topic creation time

[E9A7F3bD]

One of my biggest complaints about phpBB is that it does not include the function by default.

I think this is a practical feature that will not be affected by the comment time to view the topic list.

I know there seems to be a plugin there that can implement this.

If anyone wishes it as much as I do, raise your hands.

Yes, this is a feature request. It would be nice if I could have it.

But if it means a lot of burden and trouble, I could understand and be able to bear without it.

[Night457]

I am unclear exactly what you mean so I shall ask: Do you mean a sort for the entire contents of FLM, based on the date of the first post in a thread? So the very first thread created would be at one end of the list, and the most recent thread created would be at the other end? I do not know anything about website coding, but I think it might take a loooong time for that sort to accomplish. I have sorted the contents of websites with only a dozen or so pages of data in a list, and I get bored waiting for it to finish.

It would be interesting to see what movies were introduced longest ago at FLM, but I have to wonder how often anyone would use that feature. I think it might include both curious new members or nostalgic old members. "I remember the good old days when we only discussed Pretty Baby and Piccole Labbra!"

Alternately, if you want a sort of topics only for new posts, then that feature is here already. Go to the "Quick links" hamburger menu at the top of the page and select "New posts" or "Unread posts".

[E9A7F3bD]

Sort by:
- Author
- Post time
- Replies
- Subject
- Views

This is the default sorting options of phpBB, which is missing a "creation time" item.

Implementing it is not complicated, IIRC, there are ready-made plugins there that can do this.

The full list you mentioned is also a good way to browse, and is also not so complicated to achieve.

[Night457]

Thank you for the clarification. I completely believed it was possible, I just did not know how common or easy the website coding would be. Seriously: I will take your word for it! I just remembered my frustration of waiting forever for a sort to finish on a short list of under 2000 lines like this one: [Code] Sorting an entire website of posts like at FLM would surely take longer. It would be entirely up to an individual Member whether they had the patience to wait, so that is not really an objection to the feature itself!

[E9A7F3bD]

This is not a "option" at all, it is just a technical issue.
And there are many mature solutions to solve it.
Or optimize through technical experience.

Not to mention 2,000 lines, even 200,000 lines can be sorted instantly.
Again, this is just a technical issue. And yes it should never prevent any interesting ideas.

[Night457]

Not to mention 2,000 lines, even 200,000 lines can be sorted instantly.

Perhaps the sort itself is almost instantaneous, but rendering the results on a webpage can take a long time. This especially became true as websites went away from text-only (like in the good old days) and filled their pages with pictures or even advertising! Fortunately we do not have the ads here.

[mimzy]

Sort by:
- Author
- Post time
- Replies
- Subject
- Views

This is the default sorting options of phpBB, which is missing a "creation time" item.

Implementing it is not complicated, IIRC, there are ready-made plugins there that can do this.

The full list you mentioned is also a good way to browse, and is also not so complicated to achieve.

We are running the latest version of phpBB. Probably there is a reason why sorting by creation time is not implemented. If many users demand this, we can look into plugins, but the plugin must be sustainable. If it is not well maintained and does not support the next phpBB version, it is not a solution. Same with @user notifications. Anyway, thanks for bringing these issues into discussion.

[E9A7F3bD]

but the plugin must be sustainable. If it is not well maintained and does not support the next phpBB version, it is not a solution.

Yes, I totally agree and support this. The broken open source ecosystem and unsustainability are a serious problem.

[E9A7F3bD]

I just remembered my frustration of waiting forever for a sort to finish on a short list of under 2000 lines like this one: [Code]

I made a demo using the source you mentioned:
https://criterion-demo.pages.dev/

Just have fun trying it out and see how fast it goes.

[Night457]

Just have fun trying it out and see how fast it goes.

YES! That is exactly the kind of sorting speed that I would LIKE on websites! I can not object at all to that.

Longish continuation of my post...

Spoiler: The speed in your demo is like sorting the columns of a spreadsheet for a file on my computer. When it is a website like the one I linked where the only items that are NOT text are small thumbnails, I expected the sort to be fast. I think that long ago it was more common to have the option of switching to HTML View to speed things up, but that does not seem to be an option anymore. At least for the sites that I go to, that is. I hardly have the fastest internet speeds, but they are at least fast enough to keep downloading hundreds of full-length movies much faster than I can actually watch them. That makes me think that my connection speed to a website ought to be "fast enough". Maybe the sites just want to punish me for using a VPN and Adblocker, or they have problems competing with my downloads and uploads. So, my question is: How did you do it? (Please, don't be too technical for simple me. I don't need instructions.) Did you use a plugin? Did you download the information to your own computer and create a new file? That is certainly an option, but Criterion is a site that gets routine additions and updates. Whenever I think of looking for information like this, I go to the site involved to get the latest information. Obviously I don't have the patience for slow webpage rendering. This means that I do not even bother to look for the information that I want much of the time. Anyway, thank you for the demonstration of the kind of sorting (and speeds) that you would like to see. I understand now.