[JENKINS-68534] Sort first, then limit

[daniel-beck]

See JENKINS-68534.

A lot of plugins have "repository" or "report" in their name, description, or labels, so that repo plugin could not be found even with the exact match rule.

The first time after a restart, the first filtering takes a few seconds for me, which is annoying, but seems to only occur once.

This method is still not great -- e.g., for common terms, the first update site will saturate results -- but this is an improvement over before IMO.

Proposed changelog entries

• Allow finding plugins in plugin manager by exact match if their names are a very common term.

Proposed upgrade guidelines

N/A

Submitter checklist

• (If applicable) Jira issue is well described
• Changelog entries and upgrade guidelines are appropriate for the audience affected by the change (users or developer, depending on the change) and are in the imperative mood. Examples
  • Fill-in the Proposed changelog entries section only if there are breaking changes or other changes which may require extra steps from users during the upgrade
• Appropriate autotests or explanation to why this change has no tests
• New public classes, fields, and methods are annotated with @Restricted or have @since TODO Javadoc, as appropriate.
• For dependency updates: links to external changelogs and, if possible, full diffs

Desired reviewers

@mention

Maintainer checklist

Before the changes are marked as ready-for-merge:

• There are at least 2 approvals for the pull request and no outstanding requests for change
• Conversations in the pull request are over OR it is explicit that a reviewer does not block the change
• Changelog entries in the PR title and/or Proposed changelog entries are accurate, human-readable, and in the imperative mood
• Proper changelog labels are set so that the changelog can be generated automatically
• If the change needs additional upgrade steps from users, upgrade-guide-needed label is set and there is a Proposed upgrade guidelines section in the PR title. (example)
• If it would make sense to backport the change to LTS, a Jira issue must exist, be a Bug or Improvement, and be labeled as lts-candidate to be considered (see query).

[timja]

seems fine from a quick test.

I think I had it like this at one point but moved it because of the performance

[daniel-beck]

Back to draft: Planning to make this work better