#musicbrainz

that release looks like something that crawled out of the bowels of /a/

that made me shift in my chair a little bit

my problem is that it's definitely not "real" enough for my needs (playlist site) so easiest way to fix is to get it removed upstream, but musicbrainz understandably has a different criteria for "real"

wooof: you could tag it "troll" (or whatever) and filter on that

oh that's clever - thanks!

tags are magic!

:D

let's add a "Troll" release status :p

though https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti_EP could qualify

how about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_Machine_Music ?

ahah, yeah

ugh, we could really use release localization / alternate tracklists / whatever it's gonna be called.

think of a good name now, or you'll be stuck with something as awful as "pseudo-release"

(no offense, whoever came up with "pseudo-release"! I still think you're awesome.)

I suppose pseudo release was created with a more generic purpose in mind

I think so. It was before NGS even.

so 'release' didn't even mean the same thing it does now.

If I started listing all the entity names I don't like, I'm not sure what I'd be left with.

Hmm. I'm only bothered by 'release group' really.

"recording" comes to mind. RG is pretty terrible.

recording is OK for me, though maybe mix would be better.

in retrospect, yeah, I think so.

But at the time it wasn't clear that it should be a mix instead of a master.

it seems weird that a recording isn't the thing that results from a recording session.

and even now it's kinda fuzzy.

It's the thing that results from the most basic kind of recording session, at least.

At least with RG I can't think of anything better.

'album' is the obvious thing but RG covers all kinds of different things so that doesn't work.

RG = release. and then our releases get another name

yeah, "edition" or something

That would make a lot of sense.

of course, naming is hard. the music ontology has a few klunky terms too.

though 'edition' usually isn't really great historically

Now you get much more differentation like 'special edition' and so forth and they're generally pretty clean with different UPCs for everything

I do kinda wish for some level between RG and release to take care of that, but it'd be terrible to use.

I've thought of that too, but my idea would probably be hard to understand by non-programmmers

you'd make a "base" release and you make actual releases inheriting data from it

can be useful for releases where only the vinyl color changes, for example

Yep. That's one of the kind of situations I was thinking of...

But I mean even now people have a rough time understanding what an RG is, and MB itself seems to have a hard time displaying useful information about RGs (like, what songs were released on a given release)

er, a given RG. ;-)

that's why I think of MB as editing-centric, not browsing-centric

yup.

not surprising given that most people with an interest in working on MB are MB-editors. :-)

luks: Is AcoustID processing stuck?

I submitted some new fingerprints and the AcoustIDs haven't shown up yet for an hour or so