#musicbrainz-devel

Should I make my lines look like how he's got them in his diff?

ruaok: So what should I change "Install C extension" to... "Install unaccent extension"?

Or "Install unaccent C extension"?

"Install unaccent extension" is perfect

and warp will soon be addding another extension

I googled it and went with "Install PostgreSQL Unaccent Extension"

ok

I also finally realized what the "unaccent" in that meant :p

heh.

its rather important for us.

Yeah of course

which is somewhat sad, because it implies an ignorance of other cultures

luks: 'at least a couple of dozen" == 24+ ;)

that's not broad?

nirvana is obviously something different than old traditional songs

you can find pieces of them in lots of songs

that song dates to at least the 19th century

oh, sorry

lol

I didn't read the page completely

only noticed stuff about nirvana

Actually, I almost prefer the Lead Belly version, and that one's from like 1922 :D

well, each of the adaptations should be a separate work

Oh jeez, work types. Way to just complicate my understanding of works :p

there is no score or anything for such songs

so the artists have to do their own composition

Types do make (even more) flexible though.

/win 17

make them*

I picked that one cause, if you drew a tree of version to version, it's actually possible; from what I've read, it has two main lyrics versions, each of which goes to the 20's or so, then those 2 merge into the 1890s or so, into a single trad folk song

hrm

time-of-day! :)

TOD!

luks: btw... do you have a few minutes you could fix something for me and navap?

not right now

k

brianfreud: Actually, it's only djce that can do it. You need server access to add a namespace.

hmph

djce said he, luks, and nikki were the 3 who could modify namespaces

That was me actually :p

ah

That was my mistake, I then looked up the process and realized you'd need server access.

gotcha

btw, if anyone cares, http://www.archive.org/details/Leadbelly-Where_... :)

Ooh, Lead Belly.

navap: is there any stuff you got Ship it! on which I can merge?

brianfreud, I feel obligated to point out that you have the same name as the governor of my state.

lol, yep

And there's also the menu restructuring that you okayed http://codereview.musicbrainz.org/r/625/

INSTALL also got a Ship it!, but perhaps you're still tweaking things there.

Oh yeah, and that one too actually. ruaok did say he was fine with my changes.

goodnight Leftmost

nn Leftmost

Tomorrow's the start of spring break. Sounds like a good time to do a bit of MB hacking.:)

smart man, Leftmost :-)

navap: browsepage, menu, INSTALL merged into master and next.

woohoo!

(I closed the reviews)

thanks warp

Hmmm, how can History:Annotation be in Category:History when the page doesn't exist? http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Category:History

That might have happened if there was a conflict when the History namespace was created. I'm not 100% sure how namespace conflicts are handled though.

Here's what I have so far for the mass edit page http://xabbu.net/mb/edit4.png

I'm thinking of maybe using JS to cap the number of edit notes visible by default.

And I also need to figure out what to use for a separator between the edits, the orange line is just a placeholder.

Oh and I'm having the same problem as before where editor names have mysteriously vanished from that page :/

I would really like to see old and new on separate lines

I haven't touched any of the actual edit detail templates yet.

and why would you cap the edit note display?

Because I think it makes more sense to keep the page short and easy to scroll through. I'd use a "see more" JS link to bring the rest into view.

personally, I think edit debates, when they exist, should be entirely viewed; otherwise, you'll get people who read only the visible notes, and jump in with an opinion on something perhaps long settled

That's easily fixable, (and already is actually), the add edit note box isn't visible if you notice.

what did you do with it?

Nothing actually, that functionality hasn't been implemented yet. Don't worry I'm not hiding it on purpose :p

lol

Of course it will be there on the mass edit page.

But as for your concern it's easily handled by not showing the box unless you're seeing all thenotes.

to me, that adds a click - ie, adds annoyance, rather than removing it

In the cases where that click would be necessary there are alreasy 3 or 4 edit notes visible. If there are more notes than that on that edit then the extra 1 second it takes to click the link is vastly overshadowed by note reading time.

Anyway, that's a minor point. Are there any other points of concern about this design?

I think it makes a lot of sense since it's a similar layout to the rest of the pages on the site, and the individual edit page also look very similar.

Edit #2 has far too much vertical whitespace

also, the edits appear to be in decending order?

and where is the count of abstaining votes?

There's never been a count of abstaining votes before.

It could be added in though.

And as for the decending order, yeah that is quite odd. I'm not sure why they do that.

ah, for some reason I thought I remembered seeing abstains counted

Edit 2 will have much less whitespace once you add in extra rows for the edit changes.

but the order thing is problematic, I think

I'm sure the ordering is easily fixed.

what about the 1/2 inch below and above the orange bar?

I'd much rather see more edits at once than have highly spaced out edits

just that much more scrolling to have to do when I'm voting

Good point, okay I'll minimize the space between the edits.

hm, don't we always have edits in descending order?

atm, I can see 5 edits at a time on the voting page; in that picture, I see 2.

newest first, etc..

s/newest/most recent/ :)

brianfreud: Are you factoring in the comments though?

navap yep

warp: just checked - looks like yes, by default, when you view an entity's edits, it's in decending order.

:P I always use the ascending order option when I vote, via advanced edit search

I'd much rather see edits which are about to expire, not edits which only were created 15 seconds ago

ah, right.

Okay I'm off to bed. Looks like I wasn't able to stick this branch up on review board tonight :(

morning!

warp: I want to get you on board helping with the edit migration stuff

but i'm going to take a shower first, so i'll be back in 20 mins :)

haha

ok, back!

there's probably no rush to get started right now, but it'd be nice to have you set up and ready to hack by sunday (ie, you can run the migration script and you understand what we're doing and how the code looks)

aCiD2: I'll be away tomorrow, helping someone move, but I can try and get the non ngs database on my box on sunday.

warp: ok, sounds good

HRMMM. How to migrate a remove release edit... it doesn't know what release to relate the edit too, because obviously it got removed

add one new release as part of the migration, use it for all of those edits, then really remove the release at the end?

no, we're not doing migration

where we can't anyway

we're doing read only edit types

for now I've gone with linking it if I can, and if not we just display the release name and artist

makes sense to me :)

it seems to work well :)

i checked it with gleen freemans failed edits ;)

LOL

haha sub is_newbie

How would I find out if an edit was applied as an auto-edit?

there is an autoedit column in the DB....