#musicbrainz-devel

Batsy: great!

I had a productive week, fixed a ton of bugs for the 0.15 release, which has all of the new features I've worked on minus collections stuff

oh hai!

(which is in the gsoc-ngs branch right now)

hai!

congrats on the release!

:)

yay! shipping code!

I'm really stoked by your progress on picard.

simultaneous releases on 3 platforms? hott stuff.

a big thanks to luks as well!

nikki, murdos: anything from you folks?

no

ok, anyone else for review?

right-o, lets close review then.

onward to the next topic, which nikki can help with. :)

plans for the next few upcoming releases.

it seems that ocharles and warp are a bit burdened by the endless bug fixes.

I can totally feel that.

wull, not so much that

no?

there are 2 areas that I see needing work though

the edit system still has some warts

the edit search is still incomplete :P

and the cd submission process has been sorely neglected

ocharles: agreed on both.

that's been in my CI for a few weeks now, but I seem to have erected a giant blockade around it

yep. I was about to ask about that.

all the CD related bugs didn't get touched.

what can we do about that?

ruaok: the release editor performance stuff just took a chunk of my time. I've only started getting back into fixing the bugs in my milestone at the end of last week.

I think it might have been the previous bugs with it before, but I'm thinking that whole area might just need a rethink

can you tackle it like eating broccioli when you were a kid?

haha

just plow through to get on with other thigns?

I feel like I'm constantly tacking more stuff onto the cd lookup portal page, and it's all getting a bit out of hand now

it deals with finding existing releases, finding cdstubs, submitting stubs, importing cdstubs

and the cd lookup stuff needs to be simple.

right

since people coming into MB from that vector get easily confused.

so I guess for me it's whether I should spend the week really breaking that down and working out where to go with it

or focus on other stuffs

its the former.

go ahead and break it down. identify the issues.

then we should chat about the issues and decide them.

perhaps we need to get alisa in on some of this.

but the first step is to look at the problems at hand.

worse than broccoli as a kid?

:D

yea, that sounds good

ok. lets chat on wed?

or are you on the road on wed?

no, tues

so wed is good

perfect. lets do that then.

but, my overarching question was going to be this: can we start spending some time on new features yet?

like the cover art archive stuff?

I personally don't think we're there yet :(

if ocharles is going to focus on revamping cd stuffs and edit stuffs, can warp spend some time on cover art?

ruaok: atleast one of us (ocharles or me) needs to keep plodding on, fixing things.

I think both of you should.

but taking say 30% of your time towards new stuff might be a nice change.

yeah, that sounds reasonable.

ok, yeah, I was going to say what ruaok said

well, lets give it a couple of more weeks focusing on bugs.

yea, warp has earnt a break from RE for sure :)

during those two weeks we can design the cover art stuff.

and then in two weeks time warp can start spending some time on it.

how does that sound for an approach?

yay!~

ruaok: oh, for planning purposes, remember I'll be traveling on july 27th

that's a wednesday, I expect I won't be back to work that week until the following monday.

ok, so noted.

I'll be at OSCON in portland that week, so that works out fairly well.

ok, lack of objections to this plan means that we'll proceed with it.

:)

in the mean time, there area lot of bugs left over from this release.

can I move them over to the new release?

do we need to do more triaging?

maybe look at that after the release?

ok, sounds good to me.

ruaok: I haven't looked closely at my current list, but I expect that in general they're important.

yeah, they are.

they are still the top 5 (25) bugs that people submitted to me.

so, we need to keep on keeping on.

then maybe next week we can discuss some UX issues and how we want to tackle those.

but, for now lets move on to linkedbrainz.

zazi?

exactly, so don't touch those. but don't add anything to my milestone either, then atleast I have some sense of progress as the amount of bugs in my milestone decreases :)

yes, here we go

warp: deal.

warp: I'll move open bugs from the current release to next weeks release.

ruaok: i do that automatically on release

ocharles: ok, great.

BarryN, raised an issues on jira

finally

sorry for the delay

regarding a cron job for processing dumps

on a regular basis

could this be possible?

there is a stack of stuff that needs to happen before we have a free machine. :(

okay

our uk mirror is free

is there an ETA?

thats on djce and my plate to move stuff off the existing machines.

maybe use that?

ocharles: no, its a useless machines now.

not powerful enough.

ah

well, classic's life has been guarnteed til aug 16h in its current form.

I've created lots of test cases during the past few weeks regarding the NGS to MO mapping, see https://github.com/zazi/LinkedBrainzTestcases

but that is taking too many resources.

I update the mapping as well, see https://github.com/BarryNorton/D2R-LinkedBrainz...

zazi: I've made a note that djce and I need to be working towards getting you a machine.

how stable r the link type id for now? and how stable is NGS general? (I noticed some slightly changes on the post-NGS release)

hopefully we can give you an ETA by next week.

ok

stable as far as schema and ids are concerned.

well, link type ids aren't stable

but they have gid's

esp now that we got a schema change release out, we're going to be the schema static for the time being.

not sure how exposed they are, but I don't think they are in the rdf

r u interested in propagating our as a kind of "golden standard"/best practice?

define our in this context.

you mean LinkedBrainz versus other RDF translations?

wrt to schema changes, we should really only have one more this year, btw.

oh, I oversaw the gid column for some reason, thanks a lot for that hint

likewise

oops

I'll hopefully work on more AR mapping stuff this week

ocharles has changed the topic to: agenda: review, next release goals/ux issues, linkedbrainz, MBS-2085, collaboration mbid's

I'll see how far I'll get the whole mapping done during end of July

I think it would be beneficial to establish *something* as best practice...

warp has changed the topic to: agenda: linkedbrainz, MBS-2085, collaboration mbid's

the test cases are quite comprehensive now, so they can hopefully be used by other ones as well

ok.

is it worth pulling the mapping rules themselves into somewhere MB maintained, rather than on my github?

they could go in a Wiki and be pulled from there each time the RDF dump is run, for instance

I'll contact Kingsley Idehen (Openlink) and Alexandre Passant (seevl) who are working/have NGS to MO mappings as well to get their feedback

zazi: good plan. :)

BarryN: is the wiki the best place for that?