On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 1:14 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
reosare...@musicbrainz.org wrote:
It would also be good to hear from Lukas on how this would affect acoustID.
I don't have much to say about this. I'm sure there will be an obvious
solution once there is a plan now to migrate the
Hi,
This discussion is a little off-topic here, but I can't think of a
better group of active MB users to discuss a feature like this.
I'd like MB to have some support for genres. This was apparently
discussed at the last MB summit, but I don't know details about that.
a genre
called Psychadelic Trance, which has its origins in Trance, which is a
style of Electronic music.
Lukas
2011/12/12 Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com:
Hi,
This discussion is a little off-topic here, but I can't think of a
better group of active MB users to discuss a feature like this.
I'd
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 9:30 AM, MeinDummy meindu...@nurfuerspam.de wrote:
This discussion seems to have faded out now.
There are many unresolved specific issues regarding covers, translations,
instrumentals, ... Most of them are beyond the remix work topic and should
probably be further
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 8:38 AM, Jim DeLaHunt from.nab...@jdlh.com wrote:
Lemire, Sebastien-2 wrote:
- To keep a certain link with the original album I don't think we
should
normalize track lists but the recordings themselves can appear on
various
releases (where each release can
And also back in 2007 by me :)
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.style/3637
Lukas
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Nikki aei...@gmail.com wrote:
This was actually suggested a while back in
I don't think this belongs to mb-style, as this has no impact on the MB data.
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Nikki aei...@gmail.com wrote:
There's been some discussion by the devs about whether links to
Secondhandsongs and Last.fm should be shown in the sidebar or not. After
the drama for
It's been more than a week now, two people raised some issues but
nothing serious enough to cause a veto, so this can be considered
passed now. I'll the to update the wiki either today or tomorrow.
Thanks!
Lukas
2011/8/6 Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com:
It's been more than a week since
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 3:21 PM, jesus2099 hta3s836gzac...@jetable.org wrote:
LL It's been more than a week since the RFC and to my surprise there has
LL been only one negative feedback, which I don't think is justifiable,
LL because it ignores the basic problems that motivated me to propose
LL
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Duke Yin yind...@gmail.com wrote:
The problem with this proposal is that it is _extremely_ Anglo-centric,
because the recording and release group guidelines are extremely
Anglo-centric.
If this proposal is to pass, I'd like to see...
1) Abbreviations should
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 6:24 PM, J Chang fdkni...@hotmail.com wrote:
Just a question: How will this unification of guidelines affect
pseudo-releases that contain translations and transliterations of track
titles? Obviously, tracklist titles will be different from the attached
recordings as they
It's been more than a week since the RFC and to my surprise there has
been only one negative feedback, which I don't think is justifiable,
because it ignores the basic problems that motivated me to propose
these changes, which I mentioned in the initial email. All MB editors
I know, except for
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 11:04 AM, SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com wrote:
…oops. What I mean is point 1.7 in Style/Recording guidelines overview:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Style/Recording_and_release_group_titles#Use_.28feat._Artist.29_if_an_artist_is_featured_on_a_recording.
Appending feat.
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Philip Jägenstedt phi...@foolip.org wrote:
1. Will this RFV also add guidelines for what ETI should be included
in track titles but not in release titles?
Did you mean in track titles, but not in recording titles? In any
case, no, I just want the current
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:00 AM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com wrote:
At the time this was proposed, the current recordings and release group
style did not include the changes in RFV-327. It seems kind of sketchy
that the discussion of how to treat track titles was specifically excluded
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 5:24 AM, David Gasaway d...@gasaway.org wrote:
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 18:48, Andii Hughes gnu_and...@member.fsf.org wrote:
Personally, I think the veto system is flawed and these proposals
should go on a more democratic basis (which would make it pass 6-2),
but the
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:03 AM, jesus2099 hta3s836gzac...@jetable.org wrote:
X « 3) Some other editor fixes the recordings, which adds even more work
for voters. »
J2 That’s also true when you enter altered titles and then someone with
the release has to fix track titles back.
PCB I'm not
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/8/2, Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:03 AM, jesus2099 hta3s836gzac...@jetable.org
wrote:
X « 3) Some other editor fixes the recordings, which adds even more
work
for voters
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 9:42 AM, jesus2099 hta3s836gzac...@jetable.org wrote:
-1
IMO we should follow actual release style.
Sometimes the guest artist is part of the artist → we already use artist
credit for that.
Sometimes the guest artist is part of the title → somewhere in time we shall
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 10:01 AM, jesus2099 hta3s836gzac...@jetable.org wrote:
All this is called altering actual release metadata and can be avoided
thanks to god-sent-at-last-tracks while keeping the ISO-1234/5678 funny
stuff in recordings.
As I mentioned, this is not what track titles were
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com wrote:
Even the long-term solution wasn't seeking to find a way to include featured
guests into the artist field; the intent was always to express everything
through ARs. I didn't know when I suggested it, but the ideas about
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 3:28 PM, jesus2099 hta3s836gzac...@jetable.org wrote:
-1
VETO
Hum, so this is the actual thread we should reply to then.
There are guest artists belonging to the track (T) title and collaboration
artists in track artist (A).
For A we have the new Artist Credit system.
Hi everybody,
I'm really not sure what to do, but I thought I'd at least give it a
try. I'm personally unhappy with the NGS style guideline changes that
increase the differences between track titles and recording titles.
This is generally about the trend to have as-on-cover data in track
titles.
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:00 AM, MeinDummy meindu...@nurfuerspam.de wrote:
But it leaves those people standing in the rain who want titles in the
database as they appear on release covers. And you cannot just ignore their
wishes.
This is not about ignoring their wishes. As I mentioned, what
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you give actual examples of your issues? I find it difficult to
understand what you think is wrong.
1. http://musicbrainz.org/recording/1b7be9fe-fbeb-4941-b1f7-7eaf9fa9f99e
-- Different languages. Let's say I
2011/7/21 Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you give actual examples of your issues? I find it difficult to
understand what you think is wrong.
1. http://musicbrainz.org/recording/1b7be9fe-fbeb-4941-b1f7
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/7/21, Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com:
Oh, and to give an example of recording/title artist credits.
http://musicbrainz.org/release/611e82cc-5db0-39d0-b47e-df42b75c748c
http://musicbrainz.org/release
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm going to need a little more info :-)
2011/7/21, Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you give actual examples of your
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 1:20 PM, symphonick symphon...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2011 13:10:05 +0200, symphonick symphon...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2011 12:15:28 +0200, Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com
1. http://musicbrainz.org/recording/1b7be9fe-fbeb-4941-b1f7-7eaf9fa9f99e
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/7/21 Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/7/21, Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com:
Oh, and to give an example of recording
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
I want my tags to contain Magnetic Fields, Part 1, which is the
title localized for the release that I have, but normalized according
to the usual MB guidelines.
Ok. I guess normalized and localized recording
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
More generally, I'm starting to wonder if we should not request
Advanced Attributes. These would work like Advanced Relationships but
instead of linking 2 items, they would be linked to only one item. We
could
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Kuno Woudt k...@frob.nl wrote:
As-on-cover track and release fields to some extent solves both issues,
it makes it much easier for editors to get started.
They ignore the main reason that brought many of the top editors to
MusicBrainz -- data consistency. I have
Same for me. When working on the NGS, I always imagined that
track/release titles will be still normalized but allow variations in
extra title information, different language or possibly different
credits. That means that we would no longer have consistency on
these titles, but most of the
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't understand you. IMO this would be quasi-redundancy, adding
extra layers with little benefit. What kind of benefit did you expect
from NGS?
Well, two primary uses cases that I had on my mind were:
- Extra
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
Don't you think this would be a little difficult to explain to users?
Change the title if the variation is small, but don't change it if it
is large. I know, this is not how you would explain it, but this is
what
2011/6/7 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.com
wrote:
2011/6/7, Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com:
I think that the guidelines regarding release/track titles should be
based on the previous guidelines, white
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:04 PM, jacobbrett jacobbr...@hotmail.com wrote:
The redundancy is storing the six characters of text [none] over and over,
compared to a 1 or 0. The latter also avoids typos.
A big disadvantage is that the boolean field can't be added any time
soon. MB has a history of
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Nikki aei...@gmail.com wrote:
Lukáš Lalinský wrote:
MusicBrainz less useful to me. I think that abbreviations fall into
the category of things that we should make consistent.
What about when a series consistently uses Vol.? The current volume
numbers guideline
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Nikki aei...@gmail.com wrote:
Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
Tjaijkovskij Bramhs is definitely better than VA IMO, although it tends to
suggest that the release contains some work composed by both. What would be
perfect (but will probably never happen) would be
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:29 PM, caramel carame...@ymail.com wrote:
I discussed in other threads about the concept of works, super-works and
sub-works. It is specially relevant for classical works but may be not
reduced to them.
Actually there is a work type (with aggregate attribute) but
The original NGS documentation which was written by me [1] says that
works with different remixes should be merged together. The Work page
[2] however says that they should be kep separate. All people I've
discussed this with agree that they should be merged. Can I change the
Work page to remove
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Aurélien Mino a.m...@free.fr wrote:
Hi,
I would like to propose the following change during NGS migration:
Move the extra title information of recording from the 'name' field to the
'comment' field,
while keeping track titles untouched.
Examples:
11
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 8:41 PM, Aurélien Mino a.m...@free.fr wrote:
On 01/12/2011 03:45 PM, Lukáš Lalinský wrote:
I don't agree with this. Take for example Talking All That Jazz
(Torti's Old School Mix of Edits dub) -- I'd argue that having only
Talking All That Jazz in the recording title
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/11/17 Simon Austin chi...@auzsoft.net
Is there a way to tell PUIDs apart? I suspect one or more of these is
mis-applied, but I'm not sure how to work out which
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Nikki aei...@gmail.com wrote:
jacobbrett wrote:
On that note, is there a similar plugin/script that converts Unicode
characters to ASCII equivalents, though only for the file name?
If it's possible to do that, I'd love to know how! It would be really
useful
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Nikki aei...@gmail.com wrote:
This proposal is simply to re-add [traditional] as a special purpose
artist. There's been a number of people recently giving their support to
re-adding it in http://forums.musicbrainz.org/viewtopic.php?pid=11319
and in several
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
I doubt it's just my point of view, as it was the idea being used by anyone,
except it would seem, yourself, who has talked on the lists, wiki, or IRC at
all about works in the past 2 years. I'm not just
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 1:58 PM, autod...@davesmey.com wrote:
Whatever you call them - Works, LKWorks, etc - the fact remains that
they would be Work entities. The mere fact that you can so clearly
separate LKWorks from Works is why I'm saying they shouldn't be
mixed together as the same
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 2:00 AM, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
The extended RFC period having now expired, this proposal is now in RFV.
I don't really see how do you want to do the change for 'programmed'.
There is an instrument attribute which collides with your link
On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Philip Jägenstedt phi...@foolip.org wrote:
On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 06:43, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
1) In NGS, a Work is 'filed' under an Artist, just as Releases, Tracks,
Release Groups are now.
Since this has nothing to do with
2010/4/4 Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com:
Think of works outside of the classical genre, think of them as
songs. Songs usually do have an artist associated with them. For
example, most Beatles songs were composed by Lennon/McCartney, but not
all of them. Would you not find it useful to see
On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 7:39 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.com wrote:
Think of works outside of the classical genre, think of them as
songs. Songs usually do have an artist associated with them. For
example, most Beatles songs were composed by Lennon/McCartney, but not
all of them.
2010/4/4 Brian Schweitzer brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com:
That info isn't lost; it's in the recording and performance ARs, where it
belongs.
You've left out the important 'action word' in that X by Y. You're
talking about X (performed by) by Y, but that, to me, is inherently a
Recording
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 5:03 AM, caller#6
meatbyproduct-musicbra...@yahoo.com wrote:
I've been hoping that the Work entity would be broad enough to cover
multiple versions of traditional songs (which often have variant lyrics and
titles). The recent chat logs on the subject are making me less
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
That brings me to Works. We kind of went into detail about Works when the
idea was brought up during Clean up CSG. Or, if you remember the Object
Model from years ago, Works are basically the Composition
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Pavan Chander pchan...@gmail.com wrote:
An NGS-release represents the physical issuing of an
album/single/compilation, on a specific date, in a specific country, with
specific packaging, with a specific set of mediums (with specific medium
formats), with a
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
It sounds as though a proposal is needed, then, to change the agreed
proposals process to add a special rule for format proposals.
If someone's (luks?, swisschris?) is willing to put forward a proposal for
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
Rather than a bunch of different responses to different issues raised, I'll
try to just summarize my thoughts and hit on those issues all at once.
Instead of writing such a long email, why not just link to
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 10:01 PM, neothe0ne neothe0...@gmail.com wrote:
From: SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com
All I (and obviously Lukas) are asking for is a similar procedure for
release formats.
Do you really want me to go into MB and add 5 release events as Other,
just so you agree to pass
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 6:07 AM, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
There's been no further discussion on this, and the RFC is scheduled to go
to RFV today. Luks, before this goes to RFV, did you still have concerns?
Yes, on Jade Starr's website you can find:
Jade decided
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 9:49 PM, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
Clearing out another of the inactive proposals. This was sent last fall,
but to users, rather than here, so it got mostly missed (including by me,
when I sent RFC-93 to clear the other similar ones out).
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/3/6 Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 6:07 AM, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
There's been no further discussion on this, and the RFC is scheduled
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it's right to provide more the binary choice male/female and
I'd tend to go with 'transgender' because it's already pretty widely
accepted in usage as the T in LGBT. As you say, I don't think MB
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
There's some groups in there, and some (Wendy Carlos) might be best set to
male or female, if they have a clear and public gender decision stating
themselves to be male or female, not Other - but that part
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
The second question is one I've seen discussed (in the hypothetical, if we
ever did have artist genders) many many times, including in
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 9:22 AM, David Gasaway d...@gasaway.org wrote:
I'd also like to know what distinction is intended by having both
Double bass (Contrabass, Acoustic upright bass) and Acoustic upright
bass. I've consistently used the former in all cases, AFAIK.
There is
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Fabe56fabyinc.n...@free.fr wrote:
This instrument will be add later, when it is used on at least 5 regular,
proper releases (live or album).
There is more than five release mentioned here -
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Kuno Woudtk...@frob.nl wrote:
If e.g. a dutch release uses schijf: subtitle on the backcover,
I will use 'schijf' in the release title on musicbrainz. This is
rare though, I couldn't find an example of this last time I went
through my dutch releases. But
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Robert Kayer...@eorbit.net wrote:
Hi!
Someone from http://www.akuma.de contacted me and asked if we were
interested in adding AR links to the akuma.de. They are also willing
to help pay for the creation of the links.
I'd rather do this:
- Create the AR link
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Paul C. Bryan em...@pbryan.net wrote:
It's been over a week since I re-entered this as RFV. There has been no
dissent, so I believe this RFV has now passed. I have changed the page
[1] in the wiki accordingly. Now, presumably, some transclusion magic to
have it
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 5:05 AM, Z johnny...@gmail.com wrote:
Well then, I guess this is goodbye to any atempt of having a useful database
for non-english releases, I'll have to give up on using Picard on my spanish
releases. Thanks anyway
I think you misunderstood the point. Having literal
On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 11:13 PM, Kuno Woudt k...@frob.nl wrote:
On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 12:17:17PM -0500, Aaron Cooper wrote:
disc is not part of the release title and will (hopefully) one day
be moved to a separate field. I don't think we need (or should) make
it conform to the release's
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Brian Schweitzer
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote:
When a disc is part of a MultiDiscRelease and has no DiscTitle, indicate
the disc number by appending (disc x)1 to the ReleaseTitle, with 'x'
indicating the sequential number without zero padding, letters
See http://bugs.musicbrainz.org/ticket/2730 -- can anybody think of
any reasons to not add it?
--
Lukas Lalinsky
lalin...@gmail.com
___
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 6:29 PM, Jason ja...@zenenet.com wrote:
Why would you enforce a www?
International subdomains matter for the user. You'll piss people off if you
force them to English International YouTube, since they'll have to reload
the whole page just to get the different social
Dňa Ne, 2008-08-31 o 00:09 +0200, Philip Jägenstedt napísal:
A question to someone who knows a little bit of Japanese. The sort
name of 岩代太郎[1] is currently Iwashiro, Tarō, which is something I've
never seen before. I realize that Tarō and Taro may not sound the
same, but is it customary to
Dňa Št, 2008-08-07 o 20:32 +0700, Philip Jägenstedt napísal:
Could those with some spare time read and vote on
http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=954 to give the somewhat
disgruntled jesus2099 more input than just mine?
It's too late for voting, but I wouldn't have voted no. This is
I'm sorry, I meant to send this to mb-style, not mb-users.
-- Preposlaná správa --
Od: Lukáš Lalinský [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Komu: General discussions about MusicBrainz
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Predmet: MediaWiki (was: Looking for a new [Documentation|Style] leader)
Dátum: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:15:11
Dňa Ut, 2008-08-05 o 14:54 +0200, Jan van Thiel napísal:
2008/8/5 Lukáš Lalinský [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
part of the previous discussion was migrating the wiki to either
MoinMoin 1.6 or MediaWiki. A MediaWiki instance is now set up on
http://mediawiki.musicbrainz.org/ with the latest version
Dňa Ut, 2008-08-05 o 15:05 +0200, Jan van Thiel napísal:
2008/8/5 Lukáš Lalinský [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Dňa Ut, 2008-08-05 o 14:54 +0200, Jan van Thiel napísal:
2008/8/5 Lukáš Lalinský [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
part of the previous discussion was migrating the wiki to either
MoinMoin 1.6
Dňa Ut, 2008-08-05 o 18:16 +0200, Aurélien.mino napísal:
I'm doing some tests to convert our Cards to Templates.
Could you enable set $wgAllowExternalImages to true?
(http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:%24wgAllowExternalImages).
Done.
What is a bit disturbing is the naming of pages: no
Dňa St, 2008-08-06 o 08:44 +0700, Philip Jägenstedt napísal:
Would it be possible to enable file uploads? I was testing if it were
possible to create a page for identifying Chinese Labels at
http://mediawiki.musicbrainz.org/Chinese_Labels, but was kindly
informed that File uploads are disabled
Dňa St, 2008-08-06 o 08:53 +0700, Philip Jägenstedt napísal:
Ah, MediaWiki is quite refreshing, I like it. We'll have to manually
move user pages to User: pages
Yes, this is mentioned on
http://mediawiki.musicbrainz.org/MediaWiki_migration
Also, the decamelcapser messed up
quite badly on
Dňa Št, 2008-07-31 o 10:32 -0700, Robert Kaye napísal:
On Jul 31, 2008, at 3:43 AM, Lukáš Lalinský wrote:
So, if we really want to migrate to MediaWiki, I'd sugges to not
upgrade
to MoinMoin 1.6, but go straight to MediaWiki.
Do you want to load the results onto scooby so everyone
Dňa St, 2008-07-30 o 11:54 +0200, Aurélien.mino napísal:
Chad Wilson a écrit :
- Where is the MoinMoin upgrade stuff at?
In the hand of djce dmppanda. I don't have more info.
BTW, I figured nearly one year ago that we should migrate to MediaWiki,
because it may better fits our needs
Dňa Po, 2008-05-05 o 08:17 -0400, Mike Morrison napísal:
[...]
So now all that remains to be done is for a RelationshipEditor to implement
point 1.
Done.
Lukas
Thanks!
Mike
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008, Mike Morrison wrote:
It having been one week with no additional comments on this
Dňa Pi, 2008-05-09 o 21:07 +0800, Chad Wilson napísal:
BrianG has voted down an edit to remove a homeburnt disc ID at
http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=8668756
Since when has this practice changed, and is BrianG's position that the
practice should change technically defensible? (of
Dňa Pi, 2008-05-09 o 15:42 +0200, Bram van Dijk napísal:
This one:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/HowToAddDiscIDs
(though you might say it is not a guideline)
Yes, this is very far from a style guideline.
If I am not mistaken, burning the exact same mp3 or whatever will result
in different
Dňa Pi, 2008-05-09 o 21:44 +0200, Philip Jägenstedt napísal:
I don't agree. If I see two discids I'll think that there are (at
least) two pressings of the CD, not that someone ripped a CDR (from a
friend or whatever) and used MusicBrainz to tag it.
There is an important point here: people
On Ne, 2008-03-02 at 03:52 -0500, Brian Schweitzer wrote:
Details:
I propose that we add a NAT-like listing to the database for each
artist (not just in classical), as was discussed yesterday,
essentially using the exact same code that allows for NAT listings, to
allow for works lists, until
On Pi, 2008-02-29 at 10:36 +0100, symphonick wrote:
I have to check if I understand this NGS-stuff correctly:
Many (most) classical releases have headings in the tracklist, wich
gives the context for the following tracks. I randomly picked
http://www.bis.se/index.php?op=albumaID=BIS-SACD-1618
On Pi, 2008-02-29 at 11:16 -0500, Brian Schweitzer wrote:
Somebody in this thread mentioned that classical music has no tracks,
which I guess is the main point of confusion here. Classical music
really has no tracks, but classical releases do have tracks and do have
I was with you all
On Ut, 2008-02-26 at 07:36 -0500, Aaron Cooper wrote:
I disagree with luks. A work title not only identifies a larger
work
but also the individual movements of those works. Classical songs
don't have titles, unless you consider common names like Eroica a
title.
I wasn't walking about
On Ut, 2008-02-26 at 10:49 -0500, Brian Schweitzer wrote:
On Ut, 2008-02-26 at 07:36 -0500, Aaron Cooper wrote:
I disagree with luks. A work title not only identifies a larger
work
but also the individual movements of those works. Classical songs
don't have titles, unless you
On Ut, 2008-02-26 at 11:36 -0500, Andrew Conkling wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Lukáš Lalinský [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Show me one release where a track is identified as Allegro,
without
mentioning Symphony No. XY and the composer's name
On Ut, 2008-02-26 at 18:48 +0100, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
So which titles should we use? The title of the first release? What if
it was wrong? What if it was so old it never got entered in MB? The
title of the last release? No good, these are often budget releases,
simplified or completely
On Ut, 2008-02-26 at 15:19 -0500, Brian Schweitzer wrote:
I guess that leads to a question what is normalized and what is not? Is
changing Piano Concerto, Klavierkonzert or Klavírny koncert to
Concerto for Piano really just normalization? Why should we prefer the
English title on
On Po, 2008-02-25 at 16:37 -0500, Brian Schweitzer wrote:
It all comes down to this: Is MusicBrainz' classical to be a database
of:
a) Titles just as they are on liners, helpful or not
b) Basic identification of the work on a track, though not always
enough to determine exactly which
On Po, 2008-02-25 at 18:28 -0500, Brian Schweitzer wrote:
If I can be forgiven replying to all three at the same, I think they
boil down to the same thing:
[...]
and luks wrote:
MusicBrainz, at the moment, is a database of releases. That means
release titles and track titles. The
1 - 100 of 180 matches
Mail list logo
