[GH-ISSUE #1089] Funny track sort order #638

Closed
opened 2026-02-26 02:33:49 +03:00 by kerem · 11 comments
Owner

Originally created by @tecosaur on GitHub (Sep 23, 2019).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/koel/koel/issues/1089

I may have missed something, but after clicking on an album I see this

image

I kinda expected to see them in order. This is easily acomplished by clicking on the # collumn but the initial ordering seems random.

Once again I'm running master/HEAD.

Originally created by @tecosaur on GitHub (Sep 23, 2019). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/koel/koel/issues/1089 I may have missed something, but after clicking on an album I see this ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/20903656/65404988-77f50c00-de0d-11e9-8698-28ebf1294011.png) I kinda expected to see them in order. This is easily acomplished by clicking on the `#` collumn but the initial ordering seems random. Once again I'm running master/HEAD.
kerem 2026-02-26 02:33:49 +03:00
Author
Owner

@phanan commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2019):

This is the order of scanning, but you're right, maybe track order is a better, well, order.

<!-- gh-comment-id:533994534 --> @phanan commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2019): This is the order of scanning, but you're right, maybe track order is a better, well, order.
Author
Owner

@tecosaur commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2019):

Excellent! One other small consideration, some albums have multiple disks. This doesn't seem to be taken into account at the moment:
image
(this is when sorting by #)

<!-- gh-comment-id:534016462 --> @tecosaur commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2019): Excellent! One other small consideration, some albums have multiple disks. This doesn't seem to be taken into account at the moment: ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/20903656/65413538-37ed5380-de24-11e9-8704-6bdda6155084.png) (this is when sorting by `#`)
Author
Owner

@phanan commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2019):

It does actually.

<!-- gh-comment-id:534033998 --> @phanan commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2019): It does actually.
Author
Owner

@tecosaur commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2019):

I would hope so, unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be the case from what I'm seeing.
For example looking at Valse, op. 64 and Prélude, op. 28 using ffprobe, the Valise is disk 1 track 1, while the Prélude is disk 2 track 1. Hence I'd expect to see the rest of disc 1 inbetween the Valise and Prélude … however, as you can see they're right next to each other.

<!-- gh-comment-id:534038191 --> @tecosaur commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2019): I would hope so, unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be the case from what I'm seeing. For example looking at Valse, op. 64 and Prélude, op. 28 using ffprobe, the Valise is disk 1 track 1, while the Prélude is disk 2 track 1. Hence I'd expect to see the rest of disc 1 inbetween the Valise and Prélude … however, as you can see they're right next to each other.
Author
Owner

@jordanb84 commented on GitHub (Sep 27, 2019):

Same issue here. Album has two discs, but instead of being ordered by the songs from disc one then the songs from disc two, the discs are effectively merged together (disc 1 song 1 is followed by disc 2 song 1 rather than disc 1 song 2).

Screenshot from 2019-09-27 11-20-48

Tags:

Screenshot from 2019-09-27 11-26-53

Screenshot from 2019-09-27 11-27-05

<!-- gh-comment-id:536007709 --> @jordanb84 commented on GitHub (Sep 27, 2019): Same issue here. Album has two discs, but instead of being ordered by the songs from disc one then the songs from disc two, the discs are effectively merged together (disc 1 song 1 is followed by disc 2 song 1 rather than disc 1 song 2). ![Screenshot from 2019-09-27 11-20-48](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/4323760/65784964-ee994e80-e118-11e9-8ae1-427fe6e43041.png) Tags: ![Screenshot from 2019-09-27 11-26-53](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/4323760/65785352-c8c07980-e119-11e9-823b-2d77cdf676ca.png) ![Screenshot from 2019-09-27 11-27-05](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/4323760/65785368-d249e180-e119-11e9-809e-4cdf3b886d00.png)
Author
Owner

@Hyzual commented on GitHub (Apr 5, 2020):

Hi @phanan , @tecosaur. I've been using koel for a couple of years and I have just finished setting up a dev environment to hopefully contribute to it.
This issue has been bothering me for a while too, and it does not look too complicated so I think I'll get started on it !
I'll keep you guys posted !

<!-- gh-comment-id:609428972 --> @Hyzual commented on GitHub (Apr 5, 2020): Hi @phanan , @tecosaur. I've been using koel for a couple of years and I have just finished setting up a dev environment to hopefully contribute to it. This issue has been bothering me for a while too, and it does not look too complicated so I think I'll get started on it ! I'll keep you guys posted !
Author
Owner

@BrookeDot commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2020):

I'm wondering if this was fixed with the changes in v4.4.0?

<!-- gh-comment-id:647041171 --> @BrookeDot commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2020): I'm wondering if this was fixed with the changes in v4.4.0?
Author
Owner

@Hyzual commented on GitHub (Jun 22, 2020):

I'm running v4.4.0 and the issue still appears when you click on the album's name to browse the album without playing it, they still appear ordered by "scan" instead of track number (not expected order).
When you click on the "play" button (on the album cover) they are however ordered by disk number / tracker number (the expected order)

<!-- gh-comment-id:647372355 --> @Hyzual commented on GitHub (Jun 22, 2020): I'm running v4.4.0 and the issue still appears when you click on the album's name to browse the album without playing it, they still appear ordered by "scan" instead of track number (not expected order). When you click on the "play" button (on the album cover) they are however ordered by disk number / tracker number (the expected order)
Author
Owner

@phanan commented on GitHub (Jun 22, 2020):

Confirmed. This wasn't on the roadmap for v4.4.0.

<!-- gh-comment-id:647416434 --> @phanan commented on GitHub (Jun 22, 2020): Confirmed. This wasn't on the roadmap for v4.4.0.
Author
Owner

@CirnoT commented on GitHub (Nov 10, 2020):

Any update on this? This is really annoying.

<!-- gh-comment-id:724750658 --> @CirnoT commented on GitHub (Nov 10, 2020): Any update on this? This is really annoying.
Author
Owner

@phanan commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2022):

This should have been fixed in newer versions.

<!-- gh-comment-id:1256043410 --> @phanan commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2022): This should have been fixed in newer versions.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
starred/koel-koel#638
No description provided.