2007/12/3, Philipp Wolfer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Dec 3, 2007 9:26 PM, Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We have three later releases of track A, but inconsistent data. > > > > What to do? > > Ok, I see what you mean. The individual ARs are consistent, but not > the whole set of ARs. > > > > But I still don't see > > > the reason for removing correct ARs. > > > > Having consistent data accross a subset of the database (see the > > examples above). > > My main objection against your plan B is the fact that it makes the > information only available to the first release. This is surely a > limitation of the current system and will be solved in the future. But > at the moment their is no practical way to use the ARs for later > releases (e.g. in file tags).
Maybe luks may provide some light whether it's possible or not to script-funk-PicardQT so it does that. BF told me it was not easy, but well, who knows? > > If this gets solved I'm all in favor of plan B. Until then I consider > MB to be more usefull with redundant ARs (which might be incomplete > for some releases, but they are incomplete for other releases as > well). > > > > If I spent some time adding all > > > ARs to a later release I surely don't want them removed. > > > > Well... I can understand that certainly, work has to be respected, but > > really the fact some work has been done in one way on something > > doesn't mean we can't have our practice/dataset evolve. > > And again, I'm obviously speaking about a border case, concerning a > > handful of editors, for a very small subset of the database. > > This surely is not a border case. There are many releases that are > affected by this problem. And there are surely enough editors who want > to have the ARs as complete as possible. Ya, but how many editors go through the *very boring* task of tracking down first release/first version? I mean, not on a seasoned basis, for a very specific release once in a while, but on a daily basis? I've seen such edits *very very rarely* in my subscriptions (which I confess do not cover the whole db, neither the most active part of it, but still) - I think I seen it once from Jugdish on a Parker release, and once or maybe twice from drsaunde. > > > > * Don't touch existing (correct) ARs > > > > Mmmm, what if I added the AR myself, and now regret I did (in regard > > of your previous point)? Does it give me the right to remove it? :-) > > I think at least nobody would be offended :) And I guess it would > depend on the people interested in that particular artist. > Here! There! Read! BF mate, your abusive voting won't pass! :D I'm gonna redo these edits ASAP :D </was just teasing> Thanks for the opinions on this, guys and gals - I guess we have beaten the subject to death, and I had to cancel the edits anyway. I'm not really satisfied by the outcome of this (as I feel my concerns about what I called "consistency" are not addressed), but hé, that's how things are... Regards to you all, - Olivier
_______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
