Check whether the outcome improved
Exercise chronology-sensitive periods
Render a controlled sequence with labels that differ under text and time sorting. Include repeated month names across years and relevant missing periods. Compare actual order with raw time keys, keeping gaps distinct from reordering and confirming that labels still communicate enough context to identify each displayed period.
Check selected and saved ordering
Switch between supported chronological and measure-ranked views, then save, reopen, or share the report through available flows. Confirm the active sort remains visible and authoritative. A chronology fix should not silently override an intentional ranking or lose the selected direction when the report is reconstructed from a saved definition.
Compare alternate presentation paths
Inspect the same fixture in a table and supported export. Verify that each follows its documented ordering contract rather than incidentally inheriting the current chart category sequence. Check a neighboring report that reuses the formatter so a change to display labels does not become another hidden sort-key transformation elsewhere.
What to carry forward
Accept when raw-key ordering, selected sort state, labels, and supported alternate surfaces agree with the intended report task. Record formats not exercised separately. Keep verification open if only one short date range was checked; a passing sequence that also sorts correctly as text does not establish chronological behavior.
Technical background: Metabase documentation.
Keep the decision with the work.
Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.
Create an account See the product workflow