#musicbrainz

We also fail at arabic numeral sort

Admittedly, instead of failing when we reach 9 we fail when we reach 10

So, it's marginally better :p

heh

Sorting is hard!

reosarevok: you could number the works '0001', '0002', etc ;)

what if there are 10000 movements!?

lmao

hawke_1: not even Bartok would do that! :p

reo: http://static.someecards.com/someecards/usercar...

:)

ehrgeiz: "Unable to resolve the server's DNS address" but will look at it once my internet comes back from failing 101

saved

hah

How often is the search index on test updated?

No idea :/

Still no Pffft ROFLCOPTER?

Right. :-)

i don't want to my edits fail without much attention, so i'd appreciate some input on these 3 edits: http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18594665 , http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18594637 and http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18594797 . thanks

I think we should just switch to the latin “et” since that’s what & is.

Bam! You’re stunned by my sheer genius!

:-D

Then we wouldn’t have to argue about “&” vs. “and”, and the issue of what’s on the cover would never enter into it.

it’s perfect!

hawke_1: do me a favour

Check the editor stats

I am curious how much my edits have dropped because of my temporary move from classical editing to Estonian artist stuff

In that page, or in general?

That page

Oh, meh, well, not surprising then

Gah, why can't this download go faster. 30 K/sec on average sucks

Estonians, y u no get better upload speeds

meh, whatever

can I get at least 1 vote for these before they fail: http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18611412 http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18611413 ? thanks :)

Voted.

Why do the stupid rating stars have to be clickable through the inline search box? :-/

Oooh

My DNS solving came back

ehrgeiz, hahahaha :D

is it your isp that's failing? maybe you could use opendns or somethin

google dns is reliable and easy to remember

DrDyna: dunno, first time it happened

So I'll live with it unless it happens again :)

oh, yeah, google has one too don't they it's like 2.2.2.2 lol

8.8.8.8

ya

Anyone know what the work is for http://musicbrainz.org/recording/ded9105c-0fb1-... ?

hawke_1: not http://musicbrainz.org/work/e13eb896-203d-39c3-... ?

(seems like the obvious choice...)

yes, that should be it.

Yep, agreed. Inline search wasn’t finding it.

how about http://musicbrainz.org/recording/52171de3-e382-... ?

hawke_1: did you see that apparently ianmcorvidae fixed inline?

(or rather, applied to it the changes that had been applied to the other searches, but were forgotten there :p)

That’s what I hear. Is that in release now? beta?

Also I can’t find http://musicbrainz.org/recording/2685263a-2857-...

Not yet

In beta on Monday I think?

hawke_1: op. 10 seems not to be there, so just create it - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morceaux_de_salon_... + http://imslp.org/wiki/7_Morceaux_de_salon,_Op.1...

And same for op. 25, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francesca_da_Rimin... + http://imslp.org/wiki/Francesca_da_Rimini,_Op.2...

(but for that add just the full opera and this work I guess...)

Do CDStubs get deleted when they are imported?

I hope so

Haven't made sure though

Import one - find out

:)

I am really tempted to cancel this edit just to intentionally lose the discID: http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18721998

huh

That would be absurdly harsh, but would kind-of make sense, if he had also moved the discID to the other release

But if not it's just stupid

(I mean, the vote)

"Hi, I just saw the other one we had wasn't right but was the same as this and I've fixed it and moved the discID there, would you mind canceling?" or something

Exactly.

as is it makes me want to just say “fuck you, murdos <lose discID>”

well, your edit was really of low quality: wrong capitalization of title, no barcode/catno, provided source with no tracklist ; as if you had not really knocked yourself out to find interesting information

that doesn't help for saying : "please merge"

How was it wrong capitalization? It’s exactly the same as the existing release, caps-wise

"À la poursuite du bonheur" vs "A la poursuite du bonheur"

Yeah, that’s the same capitalization

ok, but then the first character is not the same one

So yeah, I trusted the CDStub entry.

Regardless though, to say “you should have just attached it to this release which is perfect” when I *could not have done that* due to the track count difference is a dick move.

Right, but even if I had: I’m not an autoeditor so I couldn’t have fixed the other release and attached it there

hm, crashed twice now, gonna take off compatibility mode and see if it does it again

still want some input/votes (whether yes or no) on these 3 edits, please, thanks. http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18594665 http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18594637 http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18594797

culinko: My vote would be abstain — I don’t see much point in changing “&” vs. and, and I would prefer “as on release” for the tracklist at least (if not the recordings)

I don’t know enough about the Hahn one to vote, though I would be inclined to make it an artist credit

well i'm also changing to proper artist in track 19 in 3rd edit and some other changes here and there. even if those 3 edits will fail, there would be some releases with "&" and some with "and". i don't care about this, but i just want some consistency.

reosarevok: You like Naxos, right? Any idea what the cat. no. would be for http://beta.musicbrainz.org/release/9b3e1bd7-bc... ?

hawke_1: looks like a reissue of http://www.naxos.com/catalogue/item.asp?item_co... in another label

Especially if the cover in http://www.amazon.com/Handels-Messiah-Performed... is correct, which might very well not be

Only thing I had found was this: http://www.media-emporium.com/CD1-468038-B000KN...

which at least has the same cover

theere, done http://musicbrainz.org/artist/dc8c2046-469f-4d3...

gah, I hate that #relate_to thing

ianmcorvidae, remove it :p

that's happening because the javascript that's run when you click the 'relate to' button returns true

if you make the js code return false, it'll fix it

should be a one-liner :)

cool, fingerprinting seems to go a lot faster than I was anticipating it would.

it may actually be done by tomorrow, hah

my poor music drive though, rahh rahhh rah hisss rahhhh

is there any way to see if the tracks on the release have acoustids without going to the recordings and fingerprints tab? some script or something would be cool :s

there’s a userscript

damnit, runtime error

fml

A couple, actually

culinko: http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/81127 http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/110183

The latter shows icons for tracks that have acoustIDs, the former shows the acoustID(s) for each track much like the credits

hawke_1: sweet! that's exactly what i wanted

Those scripts are some of my favorites

well, the second one seems better for me (yet), the only thing i miss is to display a number of acoustids instead of the icon.

I like the first one for that.

Which reminds me: jesus2099: When you read the scrollback — feature request: can you have that script sort active/linked acoustIDs before unlinked ones?

I love most everything about that script now.

The hiding of the +relate +merge links removed the last irritation

Hi how would I search for a CD by Album title?

winstonw: on the web page?

What tag is it?

Recording?

release

winstonw: release group is probably what you want

or release group, maybe.

or release*

kind of useless :P

how so?

seems to work for me :P

I mean, this should be on the wiki or the how to :D