fix(transaction-history): migrate from confirmations to timestamp-based sorting

[DeckerSU]

This reverts the changes from 9900372 that attempted to show unconfirmed transactions first. The previous approach caused transactions to appear in a chaotic order during synchronization, creating confusion until all transactions are fully loaded.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on base/target branches other than the default branch.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch patch-fix-tx-history-sync-display

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[github-actions]

Visit the preview URL for this PR (updated for commit fd93e94):

https://walletrc--pull-3338-merge-v9nhvc23.web.app

_{(expires Tue, 11 Nov 2025 18:12:36 GMT)}

_{🔥 via Firebase Hosting GitHub Action 🌎}

_{Sign: f66a4ff03faa546f12f0ae5a841bd9eff2714dcc}

[smk762]

Possible duplication of #3327
@takenagain pls coordinate with @DeckerSU to resolve these PRs

[DeckerSU]

Possible duplication of #3327 @takenagain pls coordinate with @DeckerSU to resolve these PRs

Yes, I guess it's a duplication. My suggestion is to let the UI team decide which option fits the codebase better. From my point of view, reverting the unconfirmed transactions logic seems a bit cleaner than adding new conditions for confirmations. But that’s just my humble opinion. The final decision on which one should be closed and which should be merged is up to the UI team.

[takenagain]

I am in favour of your solution of reverting to the previous timestamp-based approach, with the small tweaks suggested below. This is also consistent with Onur's comments about the move away from the confirmations field in KDF, and to rather exclusively use the timestamp field in the UI.

Could we copy over the change to update timestamps for existing entries from #3327 to lines 190 and 110. This will update the timestamp for unconfirmed transactions from "Now" to a valid timestamp as events stream in via SSE while on the page.