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

[Feature Request]: Configuration setting to determine selector field order (incoming or sorted) #2558

Closed
usbrandon opened this issue Mar 12, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #2562
Assignees
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@usbrandon
Copy link
Contributor

What would you like to happen?

I would love a configuration setting that would set the behavior of the selectors in transforms to either present the fields in the stream order or allow them to be sorted alphabetically.

Some folks may love things in alphabetical order.

My use case is that outgoing streams often need to be ordered a certain way. It feels like Hop works against me because no matter how hard I work to get fields ordered to specification, every transform step tries to take the incoming field names and sort them alphabetically. Sometimes it causes a lot of scrolling. I often know the relative position of a field I am looking for. Since it does not affect the stream itself but reduces my productivity building it, I prefer to give folks the option.

Issue Priority

Priority: 3

Issue Component

Component: Hop Gui

@usbrandon
Copy link
Contributor Author

Transforms that are most popular would be the best incremental candidates. For example, Select Values and its field drop down selector on the three tabs. Stream lookup, Database Join, Memory Group By, Calculator, Analysis (look n rows forward, backward, selecting a field).

hansva added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 29, 2023
Configuration setting to determine selector field order #2558
@hansva hansva modified the milestones: 2.4, 2.5 Mar 29, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants