Recently used sections

[Myestery]

fix #3077
requires comfyanonymous/ComfyUI#8792 to be merged

┆Issue is synchronized with this Notion page by Unito

[Myestery]

[christian-byrne]

reviewing now

[christian-byrne]

Key Issues Found:

1. Documentation - recentItemsStore.ts:26 comment says 'first 5' but uses dynamic maxRecentItemCount

2. Code Duplication - RecentModelsSection.vue & RecentWorkflowsSection.vue are 90% identical. Consider creating a generic RecentItemsSection component.

3. API Usage - Both components use TreeExplorer for flat lists requiring 'dummy' expandedKeys - might be overkill for simple lists

4. Error Handling - Add validation in sorting: .filter(m => typeof m.last_modified === 'number')

Overall: Good Vue 3 patterns and excellent test coverage. Main concern is component duplication for maintainability.

[christian-byrne]

The PR is looking really good overall. There are a lot of strengths:

• Excellent test coverage with realistic mock data
• Good i18n support
• Clean Vue 3.5 Composition API code quality/style
• Well-typed, good usage of generics and types
• Clean separation of concerns in the stores
• Follows existing ComfyUI_frontend patterns for settings and sidebar components excellently
• Proper accessibility with keyboard navigation support
• Efficient code with use of computed values and parallel requests

I added various comments about potential improvements we could make.

Also, I had some general ideas for things we could add but don't necessarily need to be added in the initial version (things to consider):

1. Move model preview functionality to a separate composable/component
2. Add performance optimizations: Consider virtualization for large item lists
3. Extend usage tracking concept to include interactions: Current "recently used" only tracks file modification, not actual user interaction

[Myestery]

Hi @christian-byrne
I have updated the PR to implement most reviews and comments from here and Kevin's mail
I hope we get this merged soon

[christian-byrne]

This is looking good. We just need to test a bit more and can include this in 1.25 this week.

[kevinpaik1]

@Myestery thank you for your contribution, i just issued you a payout!

[BenraouaneSoufiane]

@Myestery thank you for your contribution, i just issued you a payout!

@kevinpaik1 when I get paid for my PRs, it seems I got scammed by you, I didn't recommend contributors to join comfy's bounty program, (@kevinpaik1 prompt you to work for ever for small amount +provide test files+ they have unlimited review cycles+your PR will not reviewed by core team/owners, whenever you finish the work @kevinpaik1 will said you should improve)

[kevinpaik1]

@kevinpaik1 when I get paid for my PRs, it seems I got scammed by you, I didn't recommend contributors to join comfy's bounty program, (@kevinpaik1 prompt you to work for ever for small amount +provide test files+ they have unlimited review cycles+your PR will not reviewed by core team/owners, whenever you finish the work @kevinpaik1 will said you should improve)

Hi @BenraouaneSoufiane — I’m sorry to hear this has been a frustrating experience. We were genuinely interested in exploring a path to collaborate with you, and I appreciate the effort you put into both the PRs you worked on.

In the end, the submissions weren’t merged due to a mix of technical concerns and architectural misalignment raised by the team. That said, I issued a partial bounty payment as a gesture of appreciation — even though the work wasn’t accepted — and was clear up front that non-merge outcomes were a possible part of how the program works. I wanted to acknowledge the real time and effort you put in.

I understand the review process may have felt long or unclear at times — that’s something I’m actively working to improve. And I’m always open to feedback or a DM if you’d like to share thoughts on how the experience could be better for contributors going forward.

[BenraouaneSoufiane]

Ok, that was before issuing the partial payout, can we continue with the other bounties (boundary error & resuming downloads)