fix: Legacy threads show on top of new threads (#5696)

[louis-menlo]

Summary

• Fixed timestamp handling for legacy threads that were using millisecond timestamps instead of
seconds
• Threads are now properly sorted by creation time with newer threads appearing first• Added
comprehensive test coverage for the timestamp migration logic

The root cause is that Jan's legacy code creates threads with timestamps in milliseconds. The latest UI revamp persists these threads with timestamps in seconds.

Threads 1 and 2 created from Jan 0.5.6, they all on top before the fix.

Closes #5696

Changes

• web-app/src/services/threads.ts: Added timestamp normalization to convert millisecond
  timestamps to seconds for proper sorting
• web-app/src/services/tests/threads.test.ts: Added test case to verify legacy thread
  migration and updated existing tests

Test plan

• Verify legacy threads with millisecond timestamps are properly converted
• Confirm thread sorting displays newest threads first
• Run existing test suite to ensure no regressions

---

Important

Fixes thread sorting by normalizing legacy timestamps in fetchThreads and adds test coverage for timestamp migration.

• Behavior:
  • Fixes sorting of threads by normalizing timestamps in fetchThreads in threads.ts.
  • Legacy threads with millisecond timestamps are converted to seconds.
• Tests:
  • Adds test case for legacy thread migration in threads.test.ts.
  • Updates existing tests to cover new timestamp logic.
• Misc:
  • Closes issue bug: Legacy thread show on top of New thread #5696.

^{This description was created by for 6d6d525. You can customize this summary. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Caution

Changes requested ❌

Reviewed everything up to 5335962 in 2 minutes and 0 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 210 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 2 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. web-app/src/services/threads.ts:20

• Draft comment:
  Legacy timestamp conversion is correct, but there is no sorting applied. To ensure newer threads appear first, consider sorting by the 'updated' field in descending order.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

2. web-app/src/services/threads.ts:115

• Draft comment:
  Consider using Math.floor(Date.now() / 1000) in updateThread for 'created' and 'updated' to ensure integer timestamps, consistent with the conversion logic.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

Workflow ID: wflow_DI6q3mzDoPdlorFS

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 6d6d525 in 2 minutes and 6 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 41 lines of code in 1 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 2 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. web-app/src/services/__tests__/threads.test.ts:91

• Draft comment:
  Sort order issue: After normalizing, the thread with updated=1234567890 (id '2') is newer and should appear first if newer threads appear first, but the test expects it second. Please verify the sorting order.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50% The comment points out that Thread 2 has a newer timestamp (1234567890) than Thread 1 (1234567880), suggesting they should be sorted differently. However, I don't see any explicit sorting requirements in the test name or context. The test is about migrating old threads, not about sorting. Without seeing the actual implementation or requirements, I can't be certain that newer threads should appear first. I might be missing documentation or requirements elsewhere that specify the sorting order. The comment author may have knowledge of the intended behavior that isn't visible here. Even if there are hidden requirements, a test about thread migration is not the right place to enforce sorting rules. If sorting is important, it should have its own dedicated test case. The comment should be deleted because it makes assumptions about sorting requirements that aren't evident in this test case, which is specifically about thread migration.

2. web-app/src/services/__tests__/threads.test.ts:296

• Draft comment:
  Expected thread count change: The test now expects 1 thread instead of 2. Confirm that the input and migration logic yield a single thread in this scenario.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment looked like it was already resolved.

Workflow ID: wflow_g0MPllNxtteORLpO

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[github-actions]

Barecheck - Code coverage report

Total: 35.01%

Your code coverage diff: 0.01% ▴

✅ All code changes are covered