2014-01-28 Frederic Da Vitoria <davito...@gmail.com>: > 2014-01-28 Staffan <lift...@interface1.net> > > 27 januari 2014, Frederic Da Vitoria <davito...@gmail.com> skrev: >> >> This RFC is to add Balance engineer to the Engineer relationship types. >> Balance engineers are often named in classical releases and just entering >> them as "engineer" seems to be losing valuable information. >> >> Well, we would lose some information, but nothing that important. >> Considering that the definition seems to be somewhat unclear I think it >> would be best just to use "engineer". >> > > Sorry, I don't understand your meaning. Do you mean that we shouldn't add > balance engineer? Why? I don't see anything unclear in "This relationship > type should *only* be used if the engineering credit specifies a balance > engineer role". >
Staffan, I'd like you to make your position more clear before I try RFV. -- Frederic Da Vitoria (davitof) Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org
_______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
