Try sorting users list by email or username #41623

tellthemachines · 2025-02-07T06:28:03Z

Proposed changes:

When the output of the users list endpoint includes viewers, make it possible to sort by login or email.

This is needed to display viewers in the wp-admin/users.php view, as part of Automattic/wp-calypso#98386.

Other information:

Have you written new tests for your changes, if applicable?
Have you checked the E2E test CI results, and verified that your changes do not break them?
Have you tested your changes on WordPress.com, if applicable (if so, you'll see a generated comment below with a script to run)?

Jetpack product discussion

Does this pull request change what data or activity we track or use?

Testing instructions:

Should be tested in conjunction with 171239-ghe-Automattic/wpcom
Go to /wp-admin/users.php on a simple site. Make sure classic view is enabled!
Try clicking on "username" and "email" buttons at the top of the users table:

Verify that list of users is reordered accordingly.

github-actions · 2025-02-07T06:28:51Z

Are you an Automattician? Please test your changes on all WordPress.com environments to help mitigate accidental explosions.

To test on WoA, go to the Plugins menu on a WoA dev site. Click on the "Upload" button and follow the upgrade flow to be able to upload, install, and activate the Jetpack Beta plugin. Once the plugin is active, go to Jetpack > Jetpack Beta, select your plugin (Jetpack), and enable the try/order-with-viewers-in-users-list-endpoint branch.
To test on Simple, run the following command on your sandbox:

bin/jetpack-downloader test jetpack try/order-with-viewers-in-users-list-endpoint

Interested in more tips and information?

In your local development environment, use the jetpack rsync command to sync your changes to a WoA dev blog.
Read more about our development workflow here: PCYsg-eg0-p2
Figure out when your changes will be shipped to customers here: PCYsg-eg5-p2

github-actions · 2025-02-07T06:29:01Z

Thank you for your PR!

When contributing to Jetpack, we have a few suggestions that can help us test and review your patch:

✅ Include a description of your PR changes.
✅ Add a "[Status]" label (In Progress, Needs Team Review, ...).
✅ Add a "[Type]" label (Bug, Enhancement, Janitorial, Task).
✅ Add testing instructions.
✅ Specify whether this PR includes any changes to data or privacy.
✅ Add changelog entries to affected projects

This comment will be updated as you work on your PR and make changes. If you think that some of those checks are not needed for your PR, please explain why you think so. Thanks for cooperation 🤖

The e2e test report can be found here. Please note that it can take a few minutes after the e2e tests checks are complete for the report to be available.

Follow this PR Review Process:

Ensure all required checks appearing at the bottom of this PR are passing.
Choose a review path based on your changes:
- A. Team Review: add the "[Status] Needs Team Review" label
  - For most changes, including minor cross-team impacts.
  - Example: Updating a team-specific component or a small change to a shared library.
- B. Crew Review: add the "[Status] Needs Review" label
  - For significant changes to core functionality.
  - Example: Major updates to a shared library or complex features.
- C. Both: Start with Team, then request Crew
  - For complex changes or when you need extra confidence.
  - Example: Refactor affecting multiple systems.
Get at least one approval before merging.

Still unsure? Reach out in #jetpack-developers for guidance!

Jetpack plugin:

The Jetpack plugin has different release cadences depending on the platform:

WordPress.com Simple releases happen semi-continuously (PCYsg-Jjm-p2).
WoA releases happen weekly.
Releases to self-hosted sites happen monthly. The next release is scheduled for none scheduled (scheduled code freeze on undefined).

If you have any questions about the release process, please ask in the #jetpack-releases channel on Slack.

github-actions · 2025-02-07T06:36:55Z

Code Coverage Summary

Coverage changed in 1 file.

File	Coverage	Δ%	Δ Uncovered
projects/plugins/jetpack/json-endpoints/class.wpcom-json-api-list-users-endpoint.php	0/150 (0.00%)	0.00%	8 💔

Full summary · PHP report · JS report

_{Add label

I don't care about code coverage for this PR
Use this label to ignore the check for insufficient code coveage.
to override the failing coverage check.}

tellthemachines · 2025-02-12T04:48:47Z

Question re the code coverage failure: are there tests for this endpoint anywhere? I couldn't find any in the PHP tests folder. Should I be looking somewhere else?

jeherve · 2025-02-13T07:49:52Z

Question re the code coverage failure: are there tests for this endpoint anywhere? I couldn't find any in the PHP tests folder. Should I be looking somewhere else?

There are no tests for that endpoint yet, no. You'd find that file in projects/plugins/jetpack/tests/php/json-api/ if one existed.

You could create your own though :)

ramonjd · 2025-02-13T23:05:28Z

There are no tests for that endpoint yet, no. You'd find that file in projects/plugins/jetpack/tests/php/json-api/ if one existed.
You could create your own though :)

If it helps I created a basic test over in https://github.com/Automattic/jetpack/pull/41707/files. The test doesn't actually relate to my PR but I thought I'd add it coz it was missing.

Probably easier to move it to this PR?

tellthemachines · 2025-02-13T23:23:24Z

Probably easier to move it to this PR?

If yours isn't close to being ready I guess we could do that! Then I can add maybe add a test for the behaviour in this PR.

jp-launch-control · 2025-02-14T03:28:35Z

Code Coverage Summary

Coverage changed in 1 file.

File	Coverage	Δ%	Δ Uncovered
projects/plugins/jetpack/json-endpoints/class.wpcom-json-api-list-users-endpoint.php	0/149 (0.00%)	0.00%	7 💔

Full summary · PHP report · JS report

_{If appropriate, add one of these labels to override the failing coverage check:

Covered by non-unit tests
Use to ignore the Code coverage requirement check when E2Es or other non-unit tests cover the code

Coverage tests to be added later
Use to ignore the Code coverage requirement check when tests will be added in a follow-up PR

I don't care about code coverage for this PR
Use this label to ignore the check for insufficient code coveage.}

ramonjd · 2025-02-14T04:12:26Z

projects/plugins/jetpack/json-endpoints/class.wpcom-json-api-list-users-endpoint.php

+								if ( 'desc' === strtolower( $order ) ) {
+									return gmp_neg( strcmp( strtolower( $a->{$orderby} ), strtolower( $b->{$orderby} ) ) );
+								}
+								return strcmp( strtolower( $a->{$orderby} ), strtolower( $b->{$orderby} ) );


Looks like this is the only way we can do it.

As a follow up, I also think we need to dedupe the combined array for users that are both Viewers and something else. See: #28317 (comment)

Going forward, it might be an idea to remove the Viewer role when a user changes roles. I'm not sure since the Viewer role is special - an Editor might still want to be a Viewer so they can preview the private site, if that's the way it works 🤷🏻

Pretty sure any role can preview a private site. I've spent a lot of testing time creating wordpress.com accounts for all my alt emails and adding them to several of my private sites 😂

You're right. I think we should immediately revoke the Viewer status when a Viewer's role changes

Mentioned in pdgR5j-1dB-p2

ramonjd · 2025-02-17T03:57:04Z

projects/plugins/jetpack/json-endpoints/class.wpcom-json-api-list-users-endpoint.php

-								return strcmp( strtolower( $a->name ), strtolower( $b->name ) );
+							function ( $a, $b ) use ( $order, $orderby ) {
+								if ( 'desc' === strtolower( $order ) ) {
+									return gmp_neg( strcmp( strtolower( $a->{$orderby} ), strtolower( $b->{$orderby} ) ) );


Working great, and as expected for me 🎉

Looking at the docs, I think a simple negation would be sufficient here. The gmp_neg() function is for working with the GMP library.

Also, probably paranoid, but it might not hurt to check that the properties are available before using them, e.g,

usort( $combined_users, function ( $a, $b ) use ( $order, $orderby ) { $val_a = isset( $a->{$orderby} ) ? $a->{$orderby} : ''; $val_b = isset( $b->{$orderby} ) ? $b->{$orderby} : ''; $result = strcmp( strtolower( $val_a ), strtolower( $val_b ) ); return ( 'desc' === strtolower( $order ) ) ? -$result : $result; } );

'desc' === strtolower( $order )

I guess this could be outside the usort too 👍🏻

Yeah that makes sense!

Also, probably paranoid, but it might not hurt to check that the properties are available before using them, e.g,

I'm setting default values for both $order and $orderby above, so they will always exist at this point.

I'm setting default values for both $order and $orderby above, so they will always exist at this point.

Ah, does that include the user properties accessed by $[ a | b ]->{$orderby} 🤔

Ah I see what you mean. Those properties should always exist as long as we're using the same user object, but they might conceivably be empty. If that happens though, the value is an empty string anyway so setting it explicitly to empty string won't make a difference.

tellthemachines · 2025-02-17T22:58:18Z

projects/plugins/jetpack/json-endpoints/class.wpcom-json-api-list-users-endpoint.php

+						}
+
+						$order   = strtolower( $args['order'] ) ?? 'asc';
+						$orderby = strtolower( $args['order_by'] ) ?? 'name';


I don't get this error? Why would the right hand side be unnecessary? $args['order'] could well be an empty string.

Apologies if this comment isn't helpful (it's my first review comment in 3 months so my confidence is quite low 😄). As I understand it, the strtolower() function will always return a string (even an empty string), and the null coalescing operator will only return the right operand if the left is null (an empty string will result in the left operand winning).

In this case, would a ternary work? Something like:

$orderby = ! empty( $args['order_by'] ) ? strtolower( $args['order_by'] ) : 'name';

Good catch. I'm pretty sure, for example, 'asc' will never actually be assigned to $order, because the null coalescing operator will use the empty string from strtolower (assuming $args['order'] exists)

Oh I see that makes sense! Yes I think in this case we'll have to use a ternary.

jeherve

I'm getting a PHP warning when testing this:

Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$id in /home/wpcom/public_html/wp-content/mu-plugins/jetpack-plugin/sun/json-endpoints/class.wpcom-json-api-list-users-endpoint.php on line 254

tellthemachines · 2025-03-02T22:40:05Z

I'm getting a PHP warning when testing this:

Oh weird, are you getting that on your local env or when running the unit tests @jeherve ?

jeherve · 2025-03-03T15:46:28Z

are you getting that on your local env or when running the unit tests

This was on my WordPress.com sandbox.

tellthemachines · 2025-04-28T03:24:34Z

I'm closing this one for now as we're not migrating the Users screen anytime soon. Thanks for the reviews folks!

tellthemachines self-assigned this Feb 7, 2025

github-actions bot added [Feature] WPCOM API [Plugin] Jetpack Issues about the Jetpack plugin. https://wordpress.org/plugins/jetpack/ [Status] In Progress labels Feb 7, 2025

github-actions bot added the [Status] Needs Author Reply We need more details from you. This label will be auto-added until the PR meets all requirements. label Feb 7, 2025

tellthemachines added the [Type] Enhancement Changes to an existing feature — removing, adding, or changing parts of it label Feb 12, 2025

tellthemachines marked this pull request as ready for review February 12, 2025 04:45

tellthemachines added [Status] Needs Team Review Obsolete. Use Needs Review instead. and removed [Status] Needs Author Reply We need more details from you. This label will be auto-added until the PR meets all requirements. labels Feb 12, 2025

tellthemachines requested review from jeherve and ramonjd February 13, 2025 04:14

This was referenced Feb 13, 2025

Replace Calypso "Users" with the WordPress WP-Admin "Users" view Automattic/wp-calypso#98386

Open

Users: implement MVP in WP-Admin Automattic/wp-calypso#98387

Closed

github-actions bot added the [Tests] Includes Tests label Feb 14, 2025

ramonjd reviewed Feb 14, 2025

View reviewed changes

ramonjd reviewed Feb 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

ramonjd added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 17, 2025

Tests have been added in #41623

298b8a0

tellthemachines commented Feb 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

tellthemachines added 4 commits February 27, 2025 16:30

Try sorting users list by email or username

44222bc

changelog

53e9ffa

Prettier code

70a95bf

Don't change the shape of the data returned.

a0d137a

tellthemachines added 3 commits February 27, 2025 16:30

Add unit test for endpoint props @ramonjd

1f08b7d

make pretty

738fa22

Fix default args

a6dcb95

tellthemachines force-pushed the try/order-with-viewers-in-users-list-endpoint branch from 06c6816 to a6dcb95 Compare February 27, 2025 05:30

ramonjd added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 27, 2025

Tests have been added in #41623

1a71d68

jeherve reviewed Feb 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

tellthemachines closed this Apr 28, 2025

github-actions bot removed [Status] In Progress [Status] Needs Team Review Obsolete. Use Needs Review instead. labels Apr 28, 2025

Try sorting users list by email or username #41623

Try sorting users list by email or username #41623

Uh oh!

Conversation

tellthemachines commented Feb 7, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Proposed changes:

Other information:

Jetpack product discussion

Does this pull request change what data or activity we track or use?

Testing instructions:

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 7, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 7, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 7, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Code Coverage Summary

Uh oh!

tellthemachines commented Feb 12, 2025

Uh oh!

jeherve commented Feb 13, 2025

Uh oh!

ramonjd commented Feb 13, 2025

Uh oh!

tellthemachines commented Feb 13, 2025

Uh oh!

jp-launch-control bot commented Feb 14, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Code Coverage Summary

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jeherve left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tellthemachines commented Mar 2, 2025

Uh oh!

jeherve commented Mar 3, 2025

Uh oh!

tellthemachines commented Apr 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

tellthemachines commented Feb 7, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Feb 7, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Feb 7, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Feb 7, 2025 •

edited

Loading

jp-launch-control bot commented Feb 14, 2025 •

edited

Loading