Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Sort evaluation list by create date #12820

Closed
lgfa29 opened this issue Apr 28, 2022 · 1 comment · Fixed by #12847
Closed

Sort evaluation list by create date #12820

lgfa29 opened this issue Apr 28, 2022 · 1 comment · Fixed by #12847
Assignees
Labels
stage/accepted Confirmed, and intend to work on. No timeline committment though. theme/ui type/enhancement

Comments

@lgfa29
Copy link
Contributor

lgfa29 commented Apr 28, 2022

Proposal

The new evaluation list provides a great way to see all evaluation in the cluster, but usually users are looking for the most recent allocations, or seeing what's new in the cluster.

The evaluation list table should default to sorting in reverse chronological order and allow users to reverse this order. This can be done by changing the reverse query parameter in the evaluation list API.

Use-cases

Monitor a cluster for its most recent evaluations and their status.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 8, 2022

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 120 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.
If you have found a problem that seems similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Oct 8, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
stage/accepted Confirmed, and intend to work on. No timeline committment though. theme/ui type/enhancement
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants