While there are a variety of ways to arrange repertoire within a rep list, I would tend to avoid arranging by the year that the rep was studied. Solo rep should be listed separately from chamber rep. Within each of those two categories, music is usually arranged by composer alphabetically by the composer's surname. Some students that have studied many concertos and sonatas, might further subdivide the solo rep by concertos, sonatas, concert pieces etc., but most will just list by composer.
For some instruments, within the solo rep, etudes are listed separately from music which is publicly performed (so for example, for piano, Czerny would go under etudes since almost no one ever peroforms Czerny etudes in public, but Chopin etudes would go in with the rest of the publicly performed rep). Depending on the student's level, the etudes might not be listed.
I am not sure what you mean by "major pieces" versus minor pieces. If by minor pieces you mean those that were very easy and that are far beneath the level of rep that a performance major, then I would exclude them. On the other hand, if by minor pieces, you merely mean short pieces, then I would include them. For example, many of the Chopin Preludes are very short (and some very easy), but if I had studied Preludes #1 to 12, then I would include that since professional pianists often perform all 24 Preludes even though several could be sight-read by most competent high school pianists.
I would list all serious repertoire that has been seriously studied regardless of when it was studied. What constitutes "serious repertoire"? Anything that could be studied by a performance major at university or is at least close to that (within a couple of years beneath that level--and yes, I know "couple of years" will vary considerably according to the speed of student progress).
So if the student studied a Bruch violin concerto or Mozart piano concerto when they were 12 years old, I would list it, but I would not list any of the easier Clementia piano sonatinas which are rarely publicly performed by professionals and whose value is primarily educational rather than musical. You may need to consult with your teacher as to what is "serious repertoire," since many parents won't be familiar with what is commonly performed by the pros in recital.
What constitutes "seriously studied"? The repertoire does not need to have been publicly performed, but needs to have been taken to a level which was at least close to public performance (i.e. so at least memorized, up to performance tempo, ...). So for most students, 5 weeks on a Beethoven piano sonata would not merit listing the rep, but if the sonata was memorized and technical issues were resolved and significant progress made in achieving a musical performance, then I would list it (and some excellent pianists could be there in 5 weeks since some memorize within a week--one of the local teachers refused to hear anything at a lesson that was not memorized--his students quickly became very efficient memorizers).
Obviously, etudes and chamber music, if listed, need not have been memorized.
For a vocal resume for a performance program application, I would not include church worship solos unless they are part of the rep that might be studied by a classical vocalist (e.g. I would include anything by Bach, Handel, etc. that was performed in church).
For a classical performance major, I would not include the musical theatre repertoire; if you really want to, I would list it separately at the end of the repertoire list, but be aware that some classical voice teachers might not view the listing of musical theatre positively--they become worried that the potential students might be a belter or have musical theatre vocal production habits that need undoing.