{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/zulip/zulip/issues/382","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/zulip/zulip/issues/382/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/zulip/zulip/issues/382/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/zulip/zulip/issues/382/events","html_url":"https://github.com/zulip/zulip/pull/382","id":122993884,"number":382,"title":"Sorting stream list based on stream activity.","user":{"login":"baali","id":451188,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/451188?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/baali","html_url":"https://github.com/baali","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/baali/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/baali/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/baali/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/baali/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/baali/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/baali/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/baali/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/baali/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/baali/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":5,"created_at":"2015-12-18T17:38:43Z","updated_at":"2015-12-26T06:36:42Z","closed_at":null,"pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/zulip/zulip/pulls/382","html_url":"https://github.com/zulip/zulip/pull/382","diff_url":"https://github.com/zulip/zulip/pull/382.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/zulip/zulip/pull/382.patch"},"body":"In case when both streams are present in recent_subjects, instead of sorting them in alphabetical order(util.strcmp), this change/patch lists them based on their recent activity. It keeps recently active streams placed on the top of the stream list. I did manual testing on local setup to confirm the expected behavior. \r\nShantanu"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/zulip/zulip/issues/comments/167284811","html_url":"https://github.com/zulip/zulip/pull/382#issuecomment-167284811","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/zulip/zulip/issues/382","id":167284811,"user":{"login":"wdaher","id":109246,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/109246?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/wdaher","html_url":"https://github.com/wdaher","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wdaher/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wdaher/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wdaher/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wdaher/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wdaher/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wdaher/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wdaher/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wdaher/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wdaher/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-12-26T06:36:42Z","updated_at":"2015-12-26T06:36:42Z","body":"First off, @baali , thank you very much for the contribution — greatly appreciated!\r\n\r\nThe idea here is that if I'm on streams a, b, c, d, e and f... and then a and f have activity on them, the list will go: a, f, b, c, d, e? (Do I have this right?)\r\n\r\nI'm torn on this point. On the one hand, there's obvious utility to, essentially, sorting the streams list by recency (like iMessage or text messages do on your phone). On the other hand, doing so significantly impacts your ability to find an arbitrary stream when you're looking for it. Rather than being able to scan alphabetically, you have to somehow know whether or not it's gotten a message recently or not—which makes me dislike this change. (Worth noting: this isn't actually a pure-recency sort either, right? It's a sort by \"Does it have unread messages\" and then \"alphabetical\". Not saying that's bad — pure recency is a bit confusing here as well.)\r\n\r\nAnother thing that makes me a bit less enthusiastic about it is that it also appears nonstandard for this type of client: correct me if I'm wrong, but e.g. Slack or the average IRC client doesn't re-order channels in this way.\r\n\r\nGiven that, my predisposition is *not* to accept this feature change and instead to encourage folks to take advantage of the \"starred streams\" feature (#285) to flag streams that are particularly important for them. (If lots of folks feel otherwise, please chime in here!)"}}