#musicbrainz

brianfreud: which i guess will hov to do for now, link them up in the annotations ;)

hmmm. how do I compile picard 0.9.0beta1 with ofa and ffmpeg?

python setup.py config sets with-libofa and with-avcodec to True

it also sets libs to ofa.lib and avcodec.lib avformat.lib for ofa and avcodec

but when building with python setup.py build_ext -i it says:

gcc -pthread -shared build/temp.linux-i686-2.4/picard/musicdns/ofa.o -o build/lib.linux-i686-2.4/picard/musicdns/ofa.so ofa.lib

gcc: ofa.lib: No such file or directory

have never fiddled with libraries like this. what is missing and why and how do I fix? :)

ok. it works if I just enter the correct flags manually... why did python setup.py config those ofa.lib avcodec.lib there?

CatCat? Over 88 what?

yay me!

jag gick på fel tåg

stackars

En gång gick jag på fel... um... webbsidan.

and I wrote this in the wrong channel :)

can't do anything right today

CatCat!

CatCatCat!

Dog!

Moose!

year

or when it was that cd started being common

would it be bork to tag valid cd's made before 1988 with "early cd"?

Mm, I'm not sure of the history. I'll look at the approximate numbers in a minute, got something to do first.

CatCat - redbook std came out in June 1980, so that'd be your "earliest possible date" for a CD

I hear they can clear that up with a round of anti biotics

Unlike AIDS.

http://musicbrainz.org/show/release/?releaseid=... <-- heheh.

CatCat, brianfreud: http://faux.no-ip.biz/mbreports/earlycds.php

takker

so everythin prior to 1980 is a definitive bogus?

cool

wtf 15 century

eeh anyone speak hebrew anyone? http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=7707823

No, nobody speaks hebrew.

Edit note in hebrew, no less.

The internet apperas to translate that edit note as "24 Pretty songs in the team

o_O http://musicbrainz.org/show/release/?releaseid=...

he released it before even being born!

:o

CatCat: That 1706 one, it's more likely that the date is wrong, no?

yeaq

Time machine!

*yea :)

does anyone use the freedb musicbrainz gateway much?

grrr i hate it when peopel do stupid liek this http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=6745327

Heh.

brianfreud: when where the first regualr phonetic records released?

FauxFaux: we sould make a report fo stupid dates as well

mo:

things put inas 1900 or 1200 etc

first wax cylinders between 1888 and 1890, first flat wax records around 1904 (but mass production around 1912)

Victrola around 1919

FauxFaux: there yo uhave your numbers

Anything before 1900 is probably bogus, tbh. :p

lol

anything not labeled as "wax cylinders" before 1900 definitly

and maybe brain will catch some that someone else added before we could have types

*formats

eh medias

brianfreud: Oh dear. :(

luks! i cannot delete the date and country from http://musicbrainz.org/edit/albumreleases/editr...

afaik the label and format doesnt need date/country

it does

date/country are required info

no year, the rest all goes byebye

which I still think ought not to be...

You could increase the ammount of [unknown], that'd be fun.

well luks, here you see the reaon why date/country required is a bad idea

brianfreud, you know, patches are welcome :)

lol

brianfreud: fix it!

Why is year so important to the data structure luks?

because it was the *only* info for years

now it isnt

lol

we had only date and country. what's the point of a release event if you don't fill it

now it is differnt

so (event info) --> year --> release, not (event info) --> release ?

yo uhave label info, release type infor and country infro, but not year

as I said, many things are not optimal, but that doesn't mean it's intentional

so if somebody has time to fix this, plase do

luks: does this have a bugtikkit?

now that would be a great fix for the next 2007 release date :)

pretty sure it does mo

brianfreud: get on it!

lol

I wouldn't have a clue

im serious

yarr

who wants choco?

I'm messing with the html and css, not the php/perl/database structure

btw, speaking of messing with the database, I tossed another 5 or so instruments on your list mo

oh

i was to look at that wasnt i

now is a good time

let me dig up that link

lol, yeah, there's 20 or so waiting

well STUFF happened zomg

I know :)

but if you're bored... :D

btw there is a thing on bugs.mb for instrument changes spesifically

i asked you before to remind me

:P

luks, perhaps a dumb solution, but to change it and not require restructuring the event part of the database,

what if blank year was set to, say, year "1" when entering if field is blank, and if year = 1, only blank is shown or fed via xml?

too hacky?

yes, too hacky

Or just allow 0000 for the year, like 1337-00-00 means ? in the date/month?

why a hack if the real solution is "almost" the same?

Rondom: fix the year being obligatory when entering release events!

I got the sense there was data structure that would need revamping to actually get rid of the required year

0000 or 1 wouldn't need restructuring...

just change from NOT NULL to NULL

web service is more problematic though

I'm not sure if the RDF one needs a date

if DATE = Null, RDF_year = 0000 ?

that could work, I guess

avoids breaking anything anyone else might have which assumes a date will be given

the xml one should be flexible enough, so if some app depends on a date, it's their problem

true, though the idea of what could go wrong on the client end if it assumes numeric and receives NULL, not something I enjoy imagining :P

Magic8ball: Should we do away with required dates?

28/18:21:49 <BadgerBOT> My reply is no.

it needs only 8ball