#musicbrainz

Hi! Any devs here?

crozzfire: they're here. but try instead #metabrainz with your question for dev stuff

(that's our dev channel)

Ah! Thanks CatQuest. I wanted to talk to the dev community and a few potential mentors for Google Summer of Code 2016.

Lemme login at #metabrainz then

yep, that'd be #metabrainz

but do know that it's 4 AM in europe right now so many of our europe centric devs are a sleep

also the non europe ones might be at work

infact, I should be def in bed by now :3

Gotcha.. what time do you think is the best to bug them?

Oops I mean introduce myself :)

Perhaps in a couple of hours I guess

uhh.. let's see. I'd just lurk in #metabrainz and post your question when you see peoel talking. you'd also wanna talk to freso, he's our community manager, he's ace with this sort of thing

Cool thanks again!

no prob mate

welcome to musicbrainz :)

Danke... it definitely looks interesting

just a reminder, beta/caa will be down briefly in 4 mins

aaand back

Hi all!

Can anybody tell me if I need a different user name (other than that of the website) for the forums?

the forum login is currently completely independent from the website; you'll have to register a separate account there. you can use the same name.

You're about a week too early :)

In a week or so hopefully we'll have our new forum-thingy where you can just use your normal account, but

ok thanks

by the way I have another question

Go ahead :)

I own a release with an incorrect track list, apparently.

well, according to discogs

You mean that printed and real tracklists don't match?

Use what's in the actual CD, but add an annotation that explains that the printed tracklist has errors (and which errors I guess if possible)

I mean there is no track listing printed on the cd booklet or the actual disc

Oh. Hm. So how is it incorrect? :)

(link to discogs would help :) )

there is a sticker on the cd case printed by the publisher

discogs page for the release say that the cotracklisting was corrected in a later printing/issue

this one: https://www.discogs.com/release/104431

So yeah, then if the actual CD contents were corrected, that's two releases - wrong and corrected

Oooh, Coil :)

that's my point

:)

Hmm

But this suggests that both versions have the same tracklist on the actual CD, and just the sticker is wrong

the tracklist on musicbrainz http://musicbrainz.org/release/acf6e8c4-a2c4-43... doesn't coreespondind to what's actualy printed on the cd

That's still two releases (especially because the reissue seems to have a new catalog number)

yes

And I think it's fine to just add an annotation to the first one, that says "This was sold with a sticker with an incorrect track listing"

(or something like that)

LOCI CD04 is the one with the (suposed) wrong tracklist

Also, wow, how did they mess it up so badly. Normally it's just tracks listed in the wrong order, not completely made up titles! :D

You think I should just add the anotation and leave the tracklisting as it is?

Yeah. Tracklist should follow what is actually on the disc

"what is actually on the disc" is just music. not printed words

Sure :)

brb

Are the titles given on the sticker titles used elsewhere for something?

I guess if they're not the names of other tracks or anything, but just different weird names for the tracks in this edition, it could make sense to use them as the track titles, but still keep the recordings (which are the same as on the reissue) using the more standard names

So if you feel that's a better course of action for this specific release, you could do that (just make it clear in your edit note why you're changing it so that future editors aren't confused)

reosarevok, are you back here?

Now I am

I think that may be too radical and maybe confusing.

Hmm. I thought that would be your alternative idea given your printed words comment :) Were you thinking of some specific idea then?