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

sorting find-package-versions #886

Closed
ctaggart opened this issue Jun 21, 2015 · 5 comments
Closed

sorting find-package-versions #886

ctaggart opened this issue Jun 21, 2015 · 5 comments

Comments

@ctaggart
Copy link
Contributor

I was expecting find-package-versions to display the display the latest version first like the documentation describes here:
http://fsprojects.github.io/Paket/paket-find-package-versions.html

Unfortunately, I get this:
image

I've got tab completion working for #873, but it would work a whole lot better with this fixed.

@forki
Copy link
Member

forki commented Jun 21, 2015

Argh. So I assume the nuget team broke the order again.
On Jun 21, 2015 2:49 AM, "Cameron Taggart" notifications@github.com wrote:

I was expecting find-package-versions to display the display the latest
version first like the documentation describes here:
http://fsprojects.github.io/Paket/paket-find-package-versions.html

Unfortunately, I get this:
[image: image]
https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/80104/8269892/910f0024-1774-11e5-9200-1bb43628fed4.png

I've got tab completion working for #873
#873, but it would work a
whole lot better with this fixed.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#886.

@forki forki closed this as completed Jun 21, 2015
@ctaggart
Copy link
Contributor Author

This is not fixed in 1.16.0.
image

@cr7pt0gr4ph7
Copy link
Contributor

Should it be possible to specify the sort order using --sort ascending and --sort descending (with --sort descending being the default)?

If we follow the current parameter naming convention of find-package-versions, the parameter should maybe be named sort ascending / sort descending, which I personally favor over --sort ascending.

@forki forki closed this as completed in 23d2755 Jun 22, 2015
@forki
Copy link
Member

forki commented Jun 22, 2015

question is if anybody really needs this param.

btw: this issue is fixed in 1.17. - I must have been drunk yesterday when I accidentally added the "fix" to the find-package function and broke that one too.

@cr7pt0gr4ph7
Copy link
Contributor

If you ask who needs this: Noone, really, because you just have to .Reverse() the resulting list of versions (if we assume no max argument). The only usage I can think of is scripting support, but there you most likely want to get the newest versions anyway.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants