Sort alphabetically entries in project.json file

[apupier]

it will be easier when having the file opened to check for projects if they exist or not

[castastrophe]

It's loosely sorted alphabetically but since it is manually updated, it's not that easy to keep it perfect. The listing should be alphabetical though on the front-end and you're welcome to start there. We're also asking new entries be added as close to alphabetical as possible.

[greg-hellings]

Once the PRs settle down it should be easy to hack a script that will truly alphabetize it once, then you can enforce it permanently after that. Or break out each entry into its own file, as a later PR suggests would be a much easier maintenance headache.

[iranzo]

Yes. invidual entries will also reduce problems with commits conflicting

[iranzo]

#!/usr/bin/env python
import json
data=json.loads(open('projects.json','r').read())
def getKey(item):
    return item['projectName']

newdata=sorted(data,key=getKey)
filename='sorted.json'
with open(filename, 'w') as fd:
    json.dump(newdata, fd, indent=2)

[iranzo]

Covered in #100

[castastrophe]

Thanks! I added a question in the PR.

[Fryguy]

Since the PR was closed, I'm commenting here. Another possibility is to use a CI system like travis, create a test that verifies the sorting in the json file, and then fail the PR if it's not alphabetical.

[iranzo]

I would do a second update if it's not sorted to do that automatically and save time of submitter Sent from mobile El mié., 25 abr. 2018 20:20, Jason Frey <notifications@github.com> escribió:

…

Since the PR was closed, I'm commenting here. Another possibility is to use a CI system like travis, create a test that verifies the sorting in the json file, and then fail the PR if it's not alphabetical. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#19 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AATEjzSrEOI_lNVxeDyIts_091yjWs6sks5tsL6BgaJpZM4S4xQH> .

[Fryguy]

I would do a second update if it's not sorted to do that automatically and save time of submitter

My only reason against that idea is commit-history churn...It will read like "add-a-project, move-a-project, add-a-project, move-a-project"

[iranzo]

We'll that's not the best approach, but asking users to keep order in a big file that can be editted in parallel from several other users isn't either... probably file-per-project would have been better and will avoid conficlts and sorting will come from the static site generator (order once per web upload)

[bproffitt]

If this is something we can add to the CI check, then I am for it. But I would put this as a low-priority need, since the maintainers of this site should be able to alphabetize during the quarterly audits.

[bproffitt]

#70 is a better approach and would solve this issue. Closing in deference to that approach.