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

Cleanup action: some fields in random order #7710

Closed
1 task done
mlep opened this issue May 7, 2021 · 4 comments · Fixed by #7711
Closed
1 task done

Cleanup action: some fields in random order #7710

mlep opened this issue May 7, 2021 · 4 comments · Fixed by #7711

Comments

@mlep
Copy link
Contributor

mlep commented May 7, 2021

JabRef 5.3--2021-05-05--a3f093d
Linux 4.19.0-16-amd64 amd64
Java 16.0.1
JavaFX 16+8

In the cleanup actions (Menu Quality -> Cleanup entries, and Menu Library -> Library properties), most of the field values in the drop-down menu are in alphabetical order, but some are quite misplaced, making them difficult to find:
ksnip_20210507-143014
It would be more convenient if these fields were listed in alphabetical order.

My understanding is that the first three in the list (see below) are voluntarily placed at the top because of their general purpose or their expected proeminent use.
ksnip_20210507-143040
If so, a separator would be nice between Citationkey and Abstract.

@dateri
Copy link
Contributor

dateri commented May 7, 2021

I think this is because java.util.LinkedHashSet is used to store these fields. I will new a pr about it.

@SuXiChangZhen
Copy link
Contributor

I also worked on this issue, so I put my modification in my pr. But I am not sure if the separator should be added.

@Siedlerchr
Copy link
Member

Thanks to @dateri the fields are now sorted alphabetically again

@mlep
Copy link
Contributor Author

mlep commented May 8, 2021

Indeed, the issue is solved now. Thank you @dateri for your contribution to JabRef. I wish you can find other interesting issues to solve!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants