Just add the disk number to each track and merge into one release.
catgroove
EEEWWWWW
what?
Muz
Munger1: on what level?
FauxFaux
YES.
warp hits Munger1 on the head with a pillow.
catgroove chuckles at warp
Muz
Grouping on MB, on your local FS, within your media player?
cooperaa
Munger1: you're using itunes aren't you?
Munger1
Create a field in each trac with the disk number. That uniquely identifies each track withing the set
FauxFaux
1. - Artist 1 vs. Artist 2 - Track 1 (disc 1) / Track 2 (disc 2).
catgroove
LMAO faux
Munger1
i.e. disc 2 track 1
nikki
Munger1: and the disc titles?
Muz
Munger1: sure saves messing up the disc titles that way.
catgroove
not
warp
and the per disc catalog #?
Munger1
That's an AR *if* it differs from the title of the set
FauxFaux
Or, to drive brianfreud insane, (disc 2 Dirty South remix).
Muz
That said, "Track number" is an awfully shit parameter on its own, it should include subtypes for "side" or "disc number" with a default of 1.
warp
and discids? :)
brianfreud
lol
catgroove
yea
Munger1
'Disc 1 of this set is titled 'foo'
warp
Muz: also shouldn't be a number.
FauxFaux
Muz: Like ProD3!
catgroove
in the *track* name?
disc yellow and disc blue, wasn't there a release like that
Muz
warp: and another parameter "disc title" then ;)
FauxFaux
Just accidentally the lamby and use sha1sums for the entire filename.
brianfreud
FauxFaux: insane, (disc 2 Dirty South remix). -> Brianfreud Insane (disc 2: Dirty South Remix.) (live output :P)
Muz
warp: so you can have multiple disc titles in a multiple disc set with miltiple discs.
Yo dawg...
warp
Muz: i meant the track number shouldn't be.
Muz
I herd u liek dags.
FauxFaux
Heh, where's that fullstop coming from? :p
Oh, there. Duh.
Munger1
The disc number is a standard ID3 tag, which appears in every track. It seems reasonable to support it at the track level in MB as well
catgroove accidentallies the disc title
drum joined the channel
catgroove hits drum
catgroove
sorry guy,
:D
luks
Munger1: that's database denormalization to the maximum :)
nikki
hey luks!
catgroove
hey nikki
nikki
hey catgroove
luks
hi
Munger1
You buy a a three disc album. They come in one box. Why not put them in the same box in the database?
catgroove
hey warp
Munger1 dood, uh that'ss
nikki
Munger1: simply because that hasn't been implemented yet :P
catgroove
yea
catgroove suddenly really wants lefse, oh man
luks
Munger1: that's the point, you buy three discs in one box, not 3*x numbered tracks
catgroove
indeed
Muz
lefse.cx
Munger1
I know that, but it sure makes more sense than splitting a release into separate releases, when all the disks have the same catalog number
catgroove
probably not the same thing, muz
eh, i disaagree
nikki
and unless things have changed again, release groups will include grouping discs into one release
catgroove
wtf go away exttra a
yes
luks
Munger1: the current way of handling releases is very far from ideal, and I think we are all aware of that :)
Munger1
luks. The track is uniquely identified by the disk number + the track number. That's how most players order them
luks
that's not what the real world entities are, though
Munger1
Like with a vinylo,, track 3 on side 2
brianfreud
Munger1: you can always add the disc number in to the track yourself, locally, using the disc number plugin
luks
you buy a release, and this release has multiple CDs
and each CD has multiple tracks
brianfreud
1-01, instead just just 01
Muz wonders how you handle multi-sided CDs as part of a multi-disc release.
Muz
Yes, it does exist.
Munger1
What is the discnum id3 tag for?
Muz
Just like how you can get dual layered discs with DVDs on one side, and CDs on another.
Munger1: not vinyl sides.
luks
Munger1: file tags are a denormalized view
Muz
Or cassette sides for that matter.
luks
that's the only way you can do it for files, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to a database
drum has left the channel
*for
brianfreud suddenly wonders why we give each side of an LP a new disc, but not for tapes...
catgroove
luks is right
cooperaa
brianfreud: we don't
catgroove
brianfreud .. we don't
really DONT
cooperaa
we give separate pieces of plastic different disc numbers
luks
we don't! :)
catgroove looks suspiciously at brianfreud
cooperaa
lol
warp
brianfreud: we don't.
nikki
did you know we don't?
brianfreud smacks himself upside the head, realizes he needs more coffee
warp
hihi
cooperaa
ah!
brianfreud
lol + lol
Munger1
luks. Explain to me why it's a bad idea for a database? How is it worse than having two disks as separate entitties linked by some abstract relationship. Currently, if disk 2 of 3 is not one the system, the relashionships are hosed
warp
Munger1: the current system is also a bad idea. you shouldn't compare the two.
Munger1: to fix that situation, you would just add disc
2
Munger1
Munger1 is now known as Munger
nikki
the current system is just inherited from mb's origins - looking up cds
warp
luks++
catgroove
and it's comming to group discs
luks
the current is wrong, but what you are proposing is even worse
catgroove
indeed
man i like the way luks' ting was
very simplistic
ome confusion, true, would still need work
Muz doesn't get how people can throw agreement about someone's elses opinions about database design when they know next to nothing about it themselves.
but yes
Munger
Nobody has yet explained to me why the id3 standard includes the discnum tag if it is such a bad idea.
catgroove
are you intentionally ribbing me? for your information i wasn't talking about the lin khe gave when i said "luks is right" i was refering to his logic
warp
file tags are not databases?
catgroove
despite not gknowing shit all about coding, i am not a moron, go figure
brianfreud
Munger: id3 started out as a hack
Muz
catgroove: no, I'm just generally speaking here. It's not just database design to be honest.
srotta
And ID3 doesn't have relations.
drum joined the channel
catgroove
funny, as i'm the only one here not in the know about "databases" that was agreeing to luks'statements, but whatever
Kerensky97
no, I'm in the same boat. ;)
catgroove
it's ok
lol Kerensky97 :)
i bet you'd get it way more than me though :)
Munger
It did, but it's basically a working hack. Like it or not, you can be a purist about database design, but when most people think about a particular track, they think of it as 'track 3 on disc 2 on that album'. They don't see the album as two distinct entities. Trying to abstract the real world model into something that is not is simply complicating the issue
cooperaa
anyone out there want to do some editing?
catgroove
munger: i don't usuallly think abotu a trackas track so and so on disc so and so, realy
luks
catgroove: you don't have to know much about databases to see that duplicating the same information over all tracks in a release is wrong :)
catgroove
luks: yes!
cooperaa
I've got these two releases opened as tabs that I want to close...
but I can't until they're fixed!
brianfreud
Munger: not true. a) I don't, and b) you assume that that track always is track 3, not 2 or 4
munger: yes, we know, the thing is ,the fix for this is already planned, to group discs in a release and group releases into "album" (or single or epe, whatever)
abstraction levels of logic
brianfreud
lol, can I pass it on to creature
?
Munger
brianfreud, I have a boxed set in front of me. Track 1 on the first disk is the same track it was 3 years ago when I bought album :-)
creature
Eh?
cooperaa
delegated! have fun creature
creature
I'm not touching that.
catgroove
staakars creature
drum has quit
luks
Munger: the fun starts when you have another release with the same disc
cooperaa
creature: I'm going to close the tab with a clear conscience, knowing that you'll take good care of that release :)
catgroove
munger: it is not, it's the same track as track 5 o some other release, it's the same track as 3 on the ingle, etc
