"Participation" and "Involvement" portlets order is different from "applications" links

I believe the order is like that to match the order of the "Get Involved" panels on a project (e.g. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu).

If we change the Participation panel then we should probably also change the Get Involved panel. I do not know if the order for Get Involved was chosen for any particular reason, but it seems like they're in a pretty good order for what people would use the most.

I do also wonder why we have the Participation panel at all, as it just seems to be a duplication of the main navigation.

The "Participation" and "Involvement" were ordered by the how likely the link wound be used. Hence bugs first, blueprints last. This order is none-the-less arbitrary since application popularity can change.

The "Applications" list is also broken. It was alphabetical, but the names of applications has changed (branches => code, rosetta => translations, support => answers)

We want one order for all three portlet. The order is controlled by links list in menu subclasses. Changing participation and involvement is trivial. Updating the launchpad application links may need some extra changes to objects that enable and disable them. Looking at app links for specific objects overlaps with bug 211117 [Tools tips are not always defined]

Granted that the sorting is inconsistent, but at this point we're talking about reordering nav elements people may have become habituated to.

Is it worth changing people's memory/expectations of where links are in order to remove trivial inconsistency?

I actually agree with jcsackett here. I'm not sure if the cost of reordering from one arbitrary order to another (even to make them consistent) would necessarily outway the cost of having these common elements change. If anything I think the order of the navigation tabs should be changed, but again I don't think it is worth the cost of changing people's expectations. I am marking this as won't fix until someone convinces me otherwise.

I don't understand the argument: the little portlet is too small for folk to have muscle memory about exactly *where* in the portlet they land.

Also, an argument that once something is released we can't fix it because it would massively increase the risk of ever releasing anything, so I'm going to reopen this on both counts.

@lifeless
I actually disagree completely with you on both counts.

The tabs and "participation" portlets are two of our key navigation elements. People absolutely have a memory of the order of the links in those elements. Changing the order of those links is a fairly big deal.

I never said we can't change things once they are released. I said the cost of changing the order of those links is high, especially for an arbitrary change. We could change the order of these links in the future, but we'd want to have a very good reason to do so.

I don't believe the fact the links are in a different order between the two elements is truly a bug.

I would appreciate having a discussion about this before changing the status so we don't have a status war. I'm changing this back to won't fix until such a point as someone convinces me otherwise (as I said previously).

I firmly believe its better to leave bugs that are under discussion open, otherwise they disappear; thats why I changed the status back - and I agree, we don't want a status war, but if we taper the discussion off, I will reopen it to make sure its not lost.