Track Merging: Difference between revisions

From MusicBrainz Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(comments & questions (Imported from MoinMoin))
((Imported from MoinMoin))
Line 9: Line 9:
</ul>
</ul>
* How should removing of a track work? Automatic removing when the last "release track" is removed? Only manual removing?
* How should removing of a track work? Automatic removing when the last "release track" is removed? Only manual removing?
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">- Automatic removing, otherwise we may have a tons of orphan tracks. We might however present a warning if the track a certain amount of information attached (ARs, PUIDs, ...) -- [[User:murdos|murdos]] 16:05, 02 September 2008 (UTC)
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">- Automatic removing, otherwise we may have a tons of orphan tracks. We might however present a warning if the track has a certain amount of information attached (ARs, PUIDs, ...) -- [[User:murdos|murdos]] 16:05, 02 September 2008 (UTC)
</ul>
</ul>
* How do you separate merged tracks?
* How do you separate merged tracks?

Revision as of 16:06, 2 September 2008

TrackMerging

TrackMerging is a simplified version of TrackGrouping. The basic idea is to allow a single "track" object to be shared by multiple "release" objects. A "track" object contains a collection of "release track" objects. This would clear up a significant amount of redundant data and allow us to pool similar PUIDs into a single object such that there would be absolutely no PUID collisions between the objects. Implementing this concept will be one of the many incremental steps toward the NextGenerationSchema goal.

Unresolved Issues

  • - What do you mean by "linked"? In relation to the editing system where edits are linked to one artist, and may be linked to one release like in 9241406? I would say, link to no releases (expected if we fixed 884). -- murdos 16:05, 02 September 2008 (UTC)
  • How should removing of a track work? Automatic removing when the last "release track" is removed? Only manual removing?
  • - Automatic removing, otherwise we may have a tons of orphan tracks. We might however present a warning if the track has a certain amount of information attached (ARs, PUIDs, ...) -- murdos 16:05, 02 September 2008 (UTC)
  • How do you separate merged tracks?
  • - The same way you merged them: a little check box on the right and a "separate" button on the bottom that activates when at least one track is selected. The selected tracks are separated and merged into a different track object. -- BogdanButnaru 13:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • When release tracks will have their own titles, and somebody completely changes the title, should it automatically create a new track?
  • - How about a warning on each potentially ambiguous edit, requiring the user to specify with check-boxes if the track should be separated or not? -- BogdanButnaru 13:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Should the "release editor" have an option to re-use existing tracks, instead of always creating new ones and then merging them?
  • - Yes. It should even be the default behavior, with AJAX lookups as we do for artist and label. We might add a checkbox in the release editor indicating all the tracks are "new" (e.g. for a new album). -- murdos 16:05, 02 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Should "earliest/later release of" track-track ARs and clusters be converted automatically into track objects? -- BogdanButnaru 13:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • - Edit: there should be checking for length and title at least. See the last track on this album for an example why it's a bad idea to ignore details. -- BogdanButnaru 14:18, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
  • what happens to AR's like composed, cover of, etc. do they get merged? (Will try this and report back)
  • Can we have aliases for tracks now? (If you merge two artists that are actually the same but with two slightly different names they automatically get added as aliases. The same for tracks would be useful)
  • - It depends if we consider track aliases the same way as artist aliases (i.e. just synonyms), or if a track alias is linked to one (or many) releases? The former is easy, the later is not. -- murdos 16:05, 02 September 2008 (UTC)
  • How does this interact with the search mechanism?

TODO

  • "Release track" titles.
  • Disambiguation comments for tracks.
  • Warnings on merge if:
    • Track durations differ
    • Merging tracks from Album/Single/EP/... and Live releases together.
  • - Also for "other", often these are demos. When do we get the demo release type, anyway? -- BogdanButnaru 13:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


(OLD) Below is a collection of all the various ideas/notes we've had regarding this feature:

Here are some notes from an IRC conversation we had some time ago (LukasLalinsky, Jugdish and BrianFreud). But I can't remember some details, and somehow find it on chatlogs, so it's possible that something is incorrect. (If somebody can find the IRC log, please add the link here.) -- 147.251.51.78 16:04, 02 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Adding new album will always add new master entities.
  • Masters have no explicit titles, everything is derived from attached tracks.
  • It will be possible to merge masters.
  • It will be possible to split some tracks of a master.
  • The release editor can be used only to edit tracks, not masters or track<->master associations.
  • ? Significant change to track title will automatically detach the track from the current master (if more than one track is attached to it)
  • There are no track ARs, adding an AR to track will transparently add it to the master.
  • PUIDs are attached to masters. (theoretically, no two masters should share the same PUID)
  • ? Durations are attached to masters, not tracks.