#musicbrainz

foo_musicbrainz yes. i’m very grateful to puid+mb because it has answered the « what is this song i found on that unlabelled CD-R » a few times... and it is only useful if we submit puids

you know homemade compilations given by frinds saying « hey you should check this out »

it’s incredibly great when you can find them thanks to that puid thing

ok

now to answer the Picard, question I don't know

hm.

I don't know what have you changed

then mbid now. i don’t see the use in them, that’s true. it only breaks up the lastfm scrobbling

can you change the server thing if you run it uncompiled?

but from what I know, Picard should be able to submit PUIDs

I really don't know what jesus2099 changed...

I’m trying again

but what are you trying again? :)

nikki: yes, I meant how do I enter it in musicbrainz -- namely there appears to be nothing in the documentation concerning non-numeric track names

actually authent works

alex-hu: non-numeric track names?

You mean track numbers?

like a1, a2, ..., b1, b2

as in http://www.discogs.com/LandFire-Gone/release/12...

Ok, yeah

Not supported yet

right, exactly s/names/numbers/g

They should be, and that's requested

For now, they have to become 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 etc

So, just go with numeric ones, and track *name* "A1. First Mesa"?

No

this I try on ngs.musicbrainz.org : client=MusicBrainz Picard-0.13&puid=94204708-951e-4e48-b863-33b256a20048%205b32cec2-2e8c-057d-786e-573a9ad4ec16

Track name just First Mesa

Ok, I see. Thank you.

(and add an annotation, maybe, saying "Track X is B1"

so it is easier to fix when we support vinyl numbering :) )

In what tag to add annotation to?

jesus2099: I can't find that recording in the database

alex-hu: inside MusicBrainz itself

maybe it doesn’t work in the end because although having rerouted request from mb to ngs.mb, here is what I see in the (OK) anthentification part Authorization: Digest username="jesus2099", realm="musicbrainz.org", nonce="stuff", uri="http://musicbrainz.org/ws/1/track/";, opaque="stuff", response="stuff", algorithm=MD5, qop=auth, nc=00000003, cnonce="stuff"

realm and uri

(go to the release, press "Add annotation"

)

I don't think you are listening to me :)

1) that MBID doesn't exist in the MB database

2) what exactly have you changed?

oh sorry i get disconnected all the time it doesn’t help :/

mbid 94204708-951e-4e48-b863-33b256a20048

hm, now I don't know what I was checking

luks: this ? client=MusicBrainz Picard-0.13&puid=94204708-951e-4e48-b863-33b256a20048%205b32cec2-2e8c-057d-786e-573a9ad4ec16

remove the %20 and it says MBID 94204708-951e-4e48-b863-33b256a20048 has PUID 5b32cec2-2e8c-057d-786e-573a9ad4ec16

yeah

I probably copied something different, sorry

np

so what exactly have you changed?

how?

Does merging works add the merged titles as aliases?

luks: with http://fiddler2.com

reosarevok: it should

but maybe I also have to change all occurences of musicbrainz.org in the request content

Nice

yeah, they do

nikki: and are credits merged correctly ?

i should check my applied edits

they should be :P

great :)

even changing all occurances of musicbrainz.org will not help...

hi

can I get two more votes here to test something? http://ngs.musicbrainz.org/edit/14464280

luks: oh, it won’t change ? can you iumagine what’s the problem ?

it would be great direct vote buttons “Voet yes” “Vote no” “Abstain” or even more up thumb hand and down thumb hand like in lastfm image voting !

thanks nikki, kuno, and jesus2099

in reverse

:-)

warp: is there a shortcut for an RFC dealing with something so obvious that got 6 +1 in 30 minutes?

would that be lukz' remix proposition, cause i will add another +1

No, murdos ' "wiki pages for works"

there doesn't seem to be a link to chat logs in the menu at ngs.mb.org

(or is that so by design?)

nope, probably overlooked

reosarevok: I have one like this too

removing a wrong language rule

oh, hi drsaunde

drsaunde: it looks like the relationships are screwed up no matter what direction you merge :(

okay thanks

at least we know

yeah, just wanted to make sure I was doing it right

reosarevok: yes, RFV it.

warp: done

reosarevok: I agree with you on this one, but considering half the world is probably asleep right now, I don't think it's a good idea to establish "no dislike in 2h, rfv it!" as a common practice :)

Mineo: I don't mean it as common practice, but I think (no dislike + 6 like + 2 days of RFV) = enough

After all, it's not challenging a previous style decision, as we didn't have works before :)

oh, I don't want to object or anything, just had 0,02€ lying around

luks: Actually I have a HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request when POST calling http://ngs.musicbrainz.org/ws/1/track/

jesus2099: calling POST how?

Now using WFetch (same results than modified requests in fiddler) after authenticate it’s error 400 bad request ...

there were some compatibility issues with the HTTP Auth, so it might be that WFetch can do it correctly

I use digest method to athenticate (all other leave me on the 401 error without sending info, don’t know why) but actually the result with digest is the same wether I input OK or NG password ...

the other available auth methods are Anonymous, Basic, NTLM, Kerberos, Digest, Negociate

now HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden ... maybe it’s better

reosarevok: the point of an RFV is for people who do not generally follow the style process to have a last chance of veto-ing a bad proposal.

reosarevok: as such, it is better to include all the details of the proposal and not have readers try to dig up what exactly is being proposed elsewhere.

warp: I included the original post

luks: now I used a POST form in Opera and the authentification gets looping, trying another browser…

reosarevok: no you didn't, http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbra...

warp: "It seems pretty obvious: Wikipedia has a lot of pages about songs

that should really be linked on Work level." was murdos ' mail (ok, it included "Any objections" or the like)

reosarevok: that sentence is a hardly a full proposal.

warp: that's all there is. It is as much of a proposal as my "add spoken to the vocal tree" a while ago: doesn't seem useful to make a wiki proposal for something that small

it doesn't have to be a wiki, but atleast include the link phrases.

they may be identical to whatever we have now for recordings, but I'm not that familiar with relationships in general, so I don't know any of that stuff.

warp: mail sent

(well, sending)

I been wanting that for about a year now, but kept forgetting to actually go and propose it ;)

reosarevok: thanks!

warp: that good enough?

kepstin: replied there, but "homepage" doesn't seem the best wording

hmm.

I think I'd actually prefer it if the entire relation was renamed to "official website" - the term "homepage" seems to have fallen into disuse nowadays

so I guess there's a few options: 1. leave the relation name as is, add it to releases+release groups and live with the funny wording; 2. add a new different relation type for this; 3. rename the existing relation (or just use different linking text for releases/release groups?)

I think the release websites are fairly short-lived

we will have a lot of dead links :(

luks: warp wants to keep dead links

to direct users to porn sites? :)

maybe I should read back scroll :P

well he argues it's still interesting data

luks: labels’ release pages are loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong lasting

almost permalinks

for a few major labels I have in mind

oh, I thought we are talking about those mini-sites that are specific to a single release

those don't last more than a year

even that's probably too much

like http://undertheice.org/ ?

yeah

hmph, I can't link that. most vote on kepstin's proposal :P