#metabrainz

but I wasn't planning to do the UI for that, only the schema changes

if that's something you want to work on, please take it :)

feel free to comment on the ticket

I guess there's not really much/anything else for this topic?

ok, 3 complete tickets and 1 SQL only ticket, then?

hang on.

bitmap: you said that you also wanted to finish the last UI bits from the last schema change.

correct

any rough idea how much time those 3.5 + last UI finish till take?

actually, if you could estimate a minimum time and a maximum time for each ticket and comment on the tickets, that would be great.

MBS-8973 does not really require any work, except adding those to the upgrade script

MBS-8973: Carry over intermediary schema changes to next release https://tickets.metabrainz.org/browse/MBS-8973

then I can review and sanity check

sure

my main goal with this round is to ensure that this is going to be a total cake walk.

in which case it will be "just enough" in the end. :)

ok, if you add those estimates and chirlu his objection then I will take a look in the next day or so.

thanks bitmap.

Alright.

CB-4: Integrate MusicBrainz ratings https://tickets.metabrainz.org/browse/CB-4

for MBS-9271 it makes semce for the "deleted users" but for things that where like sapmmers or name squatters. maybe not?

MBS-9271: Prevent usernames from being reused https://tickets.metabrainz.org/browse/MBS-9271

should we just implement ratings separately from MB or is that a bad idea?

I'd like to move ratings off MB entirely

I think it's a bad idea. Maybe move ratings from MB to CB instead.

If possible. UI wise at least

+1 to that

duplicating ratings is a bad idea.

But having ratings in different places is not good.

how do you suggest to move them?

moving them probably makes sense.

the moving thing!

which entities can be rated in musicbrainz?

good point, Gentlecat

album artist recording

and, oddly, RG

CB doesn't have recordings.

I think.. mayve lables?

release can't actually

Only RG

wat? was that changed?

so, moving them entirely would need more changes.

Gentlecat: is reviewing recordings in the plan for CB?

It's always been like that, release "ratings" are stored at the RG level

doesn't make a sense, a different release can have worse .. something (loudness and DR t coems ot mind)

I also think releases should have ratings, https://tickets.metabrainz.org/browse/MBS-4816

maybe I'm thinking of folksonomy tags o_O

MBS-4816: Can't rate releases independently

I don't think we planned to do this

since recordings cna be "released seperatly" i don't see wh not maybe

well, if we don't have recordings in CB, we can;t move wholesale.

If you don't want to add full reviews for recordings, maybe don't, although being able to review, at least, a music video sounds interesting

it's just that I think rating are really important and it would be easier to implement that separately in CB

reosarevok: I guess it's mostly more overhead since it will have to keep track of more entities in CB?

If we had an API that was central and easy to use any and all of our sites could do ratings.

lol, i already voted ofr tat ticket reo

another thing is that ratings in reviews and in MB don't necessarily have to match

CB could be the rating store with API and then all our other projects use CB for ratings.

Well, if we want to expand CB to books and whatnot eventually, we should be used to have a lot of stuff to rate, Freso

someone suggested allowing submitting multiple reviews for the same entity, what are we going to do in that case?

hello

FWIW, we already have a rating handling central API at mb.o.

Freso: this is not something we can use

Freso: only central as long as we only rate MB stuff :p

actually someitme it makes sense to be able ot review recordings separatl. soemtimes I have quit a lot to say aobut spesific songs my favourite but putting it in a release review is.. well

So if ratings move from mb.o to CB, that API will also have to be considered.

there's no way to know if someone changes rating on MB

and if they do, should we change their rating on a review in CB?

(Esp. considering tha the mb.o/ws/ ratings API is editable. Ie., you can submit ratings from a player/tagger/program to MB.)

Gentlecat: perhaps the first step is to design an API that would allow all MB projects to use ratings.

even if CB doesn't use recording ratings.

Gentlecat: you can make revew and rating independantly on CB , possin´bly. but it makesm uch more sence to have ratings centralised in one palce

that rating is probably related to a review, and they might forget that they reviewed an entity

and CB seems lie kthel ogila choice for such

(but that's also because I like reviews without grades)

I'm personally much more likely to rate something than to review it.

ruaok: API where?

in CB

I assume most people are, yes (re: Freso)

ratings wiouth reviews and rewies witouth ratings should both be possible

or a separate new API that uses the CB database. whatever.

or RatingsBrainz

isn't that like like CB

and API with no web interface

Also, if the API can be made simple, there are a lot of people that would love for a service to store their ratings of the music so they won't get lost when they "restart" their library or whatever.

+++!

omg yes

I think this is being made way too complex than it needs to be

http://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/johanna_... allows ratings without reviews, but I'm not sure if they allow reviews without ratings

(Based on conversations seen on Kodi forums and in #beets and other places.)

all people want to do is attach a number to their review

also not to mention corrolating your rating s of tracks in different places eg. if yo uswitch musicplayer or use a portable one etc etc

Gentlecat: that is true. yet we need to consider the aspects of how to do that.

we are doing that.

Leo_Verto: I think your topic will have to wait for next week.

we need to consider all the angles and the solution might be simpler, but you can't arrive at a solution until you consider all the possible cases that might affect this decision.

again, I think rating in a review should be separate from a rating that is given outside of a review

seems to be what CB was made for :O

because review might be written around a rating that is associated with it

Gentlecat: I don't think anyone suggested to tie the two together.

But then it's not CB-4 anymore :)

CB-4: Integrate MusicBrainz ratings https://tickets.metabrainz.org/browse/CB-4

so like "you've written a review, (optionally) add a rting:"

which means that it can be already implemented, if it's going to be separate

right, not really CB-4 anymore

not until we consider the uses cases to hand.

but having some kind of rating would be nice

(3 minutes left of meeting.)

but definitely a bad idea to implement separate ratings on mb and cb and onward . i think

Well, the use cases are a) people want a review with a number in it, b) people want to rate stuff, not necessarily with a review

we've grown out of the phase where we can just start coding on things. we need to consider the ramifications of this on our other projects.

reosarevok: good start. now how about from a developer's perspective?

reosarevok: c: some people like to read a rewiew that doesn't necessary have a rating related ot it?

a) doesn't need to be connected to b), and actually it might even be better if it's not, then we can decide what sort of rating we want (we can have 1-to-5 as well, but we can have 1-to-100, or even multiple things you could review)

CatQuest: yeah I don't think they should be mandatory

I think this needs more discussion.

either make a new ticket and have someone adopt it or make a topic for the summit.

Or a topic on the forum?

Like, I've seen reviews that are "Performance: rating X" and "Recording quality: rating Y" (for classical mostly)

sure.

and review in a week?

Since the two are not connected, and people might care about one more than the other

there isn't enough time for reach any sort of conclusion now.

Having 1-to-5 is kinda simplistic for that

Yeah, forum sounds good :)

yes

Agreed.

Freso: if only there was a category to discuss CB stuff

Gentlecat: There is. /c/metabrainz

sure, but who knows that?

reosarevok: I've been thinking we should have 1-10 or 1-5 with ability to half-heart(star) something.. since rating can be a half star if enough people rate up/down

still don't understand that decision, tbh

It says in its description.

Anyway. That's not the topic for the meeting.