[MBS-2086] Aliases: separate localised aliases from other aliases 2 8 9
2011-12-22 35629, 2011
reosarevok
I say 12, but because I want this :p
2011-12-22 35649, 2011
kepstin
I think the localized aliases are implemented wrong right now, and we should fix them first :/
2011-12-22 35649, 2011
hawke_1
12 sounds reasonable
2011-12-22 35649, 2011
warp
unsched, because they have more votes.
2011-12-22 35608, 2011
reosarevok
kepstin: I'd agree with that too
2011-12-22 35611, 2011
warp
:P
2011-12-22 35615, 2011
reosarevok
But I want i18n
2011-12-22 35617, 2011
ocharles
I don't mind 12
2011-12-22 35619, 2011
hawke_1
+1 kepstin
2011-12-22 35623, 2011
ocharles
For this, it's a trivial fix
2011-12-22 35626, 2011
ocharles
(ORDER NULLS LAST)
2011-12-22 35629, 2011
reosarevok
And for that, we need localised stuff being easy
2011-12-22 35646, 2011
reosarevok
(also better, but that's a separate issue)
2011-12-22 35604, 2011
kepstin
well, if it's a trivial fix, might as well :)
2011-12-22 35604, 2011
nikki
ocharles: then it might as well be 12 :P
2011-12-22 35608, 2011
ocharles
final votes then?
2011-12-22 35611, 2011
reosarevok
12
2011-12-22 35614, 2011
reosarevok
I guess
2011-12-22 35616, 2011
ocharles
ok
2011-12-22 35618, 2011
reosarevok
[MBS-709] Allow searching for a deleted entity's edits 1 10 8
2011-12-22 35625, 2011
reosarevok has no idea how hard it is
2011-12-22 35646, 2011
nikki
does /entity/mbid/edits work if the entity is deleted?
2011-12-22 35650, 2011
ocharles
no
2011-12-22 35653, 2011
ocharles
the mbid gets deleted
2011-12-22 35653, 2011
nikki
oh
2011-12-22 35605, 2011
hawke_1
Is that one even possible at all, without overhauling edits completely?
2011-12-22 35606, 2011
nikki
and we don't store the mbid in the edits either?
2011-12-22 35608, 2011
warp
can we please stop deleting mbids?
2011-12-22 35609, 2011
ocharles
nope
2011-12-22 35612, 2011
ocharles
warp: +1
2011-12-22 35617, 2011
hawke_1
(Not that that would be a bad thing)
2011-12-22 35633, 2011
ocharles
hawke_1: If we stop deleting MBIDs, that's the best solution for now
2011-12-22 35643, 2011
nikki
I think it's probably unsched until we fix things like that then
2011-12-22 35644, 2011
ocharles
otherwise, new edit system
2011-12-22 35649, 2011
ocharles
so I think unsched too
2011-12-22 35655, 2011
ocharles
(both are fairly invasive changes)
2011-12-22 35601, 2011
warp
ocharles: stop deleting mbids would be a lot of work?
2011-12-22 35620, 2011
kepstin
warp: they're stored in the artist table right now, so when the artist is deleted, so goes the mbid
2011-12-22 35620, 2011
ocharles
warp: well, we now need to display deleted stuff as deleted, rehaul the pages for deleted entities, exclude them from search
2011-12-22 35630, 2011
ocharles
or figure out sensible UI for just about everywhere entities are used
2011-12-22 35645, 2011
ocharles
I think it's more work than just flipping a bool
2011-12-22 35602, 2011
warp
ocharles: ok
2011-12-22 35627, 2011
ocharles
unsched and next?
2011-12-22 35634, 2011
reosarevok
Ok
2011-12-22 35635, 2011
reosarevok
[MBS-3288] Release group type isn't shown when looking up a release group 9 8 3
2011-12-22 35642, 2011
nikki
3
2011-12-22 35643, 2011
ocharles
3
2011-12-22 35644, 2011
reosarevok
Sounds simple, 3
2011-12-22 35608, 2011
warp agrees.
2011-12-22 35618, 2011
reosarevok
Cool!
2011-12-22 35619, 2011
reosarevok
[MBS-2199] Context help for release type when editing release 5 11 4
2011-12-22 35631, 2011
reosarevok
However, a grayed out "type" combo box is shown in the release editor. This is confusing, I suggest that you add one of those question mark things (like the one next to "various artists release") explaining this.
2011-12-22 35636, 2011
warp
12, judging from the votes.
2011-12-22 35640, 2011
reosarevok
12 could be OK
2011-12-22 35644, 2011
reosarevok
But 3 would be better
2011-12-22 35646, 2011
ocharles
12, RE
2011-12-22 35647, 2011
nikki
12
2011-12-22 35653, 2011
reosarevok
12
2011-12-22 35602, 2011
reosarevok
And hope hrsfjdjf aka JW does it sooner
2011-12-22 35603, 2011
reosarevok
:p
2011-12-22 35606, 2011
ocharles
heh
2011-12-22 35633, 2011
reosarevok
Someone point him to it
2011-12-22 35636, 2011
reosarevok
[MBS-2654] Merge Album 'diff' tool 3 11 7
2011-12-22 35641, 2011
reosarevok abstains
2011-12-22 35642, 2011
nikki
12 would be awesome for that
2011-12-22 35646, 2011
ocharles
hrm
2011-12-22 35654, 2011
reosarevok
12 would be cool but no idea how hard it is
2011-12-22 35657, 2011
reosarevok
And we have lots of 12
2011-12-22 35601, 2011
ocharles
Are we getting bad merges at the moment, or are we just not making it as easy as it could be?
2011-12-22 35629, 2011
reosarevok
Mostly b)
2011-12-22 35654, 2011
ocharles reviews the 12 month bucket
2011-12-22 35614, 2011
ocharles
Hmm
2011-12-22 35621, 2011
ocharles
I can see it being the next relationship editor that's all...
2011-12-22 35638, 2011
ocharles
ok, I think 12, because getting our current interface better should be a priority
2011-12-22 35645, 2011
warp
put it in 12 and see how many votes it gets.
2011-12-22 35646, 2011
ocharles
(encouraging more editing)
2011-12-22 35653, 2011
nikki
it doesn't seem like it would be that hard with only two releases, the problem is more that we can merge multiple releases at once :/
2011-12-22 35653, 2011
ocharles
12 also matches what people want
2011-12-22 35658, 2011
ocharles
nikki: right
2011-12-22 35616, 2011
reosarevok would agree with limiting merging to only 2 releases tbh
2011-12-22 35621, 2011
nikki
same
2011-12-22 35624, 2011
reosarevok
At least merge-merge
2011-12-22 35629, 2011
reosarevok
Not merge-append, probably
2011-12-22 35634, 2011
ocharles
sort that out later
2011-12-22 35636, 2011
reosarevok
Ok
2011-12-22 35637, 2011
ocharles
but for now, ticket goes to 12 mo bucket
2011-12-22 35644, 2011
ocharles
and need that damn planning status :P
2011-12-22 35645, 2011
reosarevok
[MBS-1412] Implement edit grouping 2 8 7
2011-12-22 35646, 2011
reosarevok
heh
2011-12-22 35654, 2011
ocharles
new edit system imo
2011-12-22 35656, 2011
ocharles
which means unsched
2011-12-22 35659, 2011
nikki
but I could imagine the diff only diffing two releases and having links to switch which of the mergees to diff against the target
2011-12-22 35604, 2011
nikki
unsched
2011-12-22 35613, 2011
reosarevok
Hmm
2011-12-22 35617, 2011
reosarevok
That sounds reasonable
2011-12-22 35619, 2011
reosarevok
(and unsched)
2011-12-22 35643, 2011
reosarevok
[MBS-487] Modify edit conditions for destructive edits 2 6 9
2011-12-22 35601, 2011
reosarevok
I have no idea why this went through style
2011-12-22 35611, 2011
reosarevok
(as in, it is not style-related, not as in "it's mad")
