User:Kuno/currentstyleproposals: Difference between revisions

From MusicBrainz Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
((Imported from MoinMoin))
((Imported from MoinMoin))
Line 15: Line 15:
|-
|-
| RFC: Don't allow/disable additions of ARs and release || 2007-08-28 || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-August/005141.html post] || - || [[User:kuno/CurrentStyleProposals#gecks04|being discussed]] || [[User:Gecks|Gecks]] || -
| RFC: Don't allow/disable additions of ARs and release || 2007-08-28 || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-August/005141.html post] || - || [[User:kuno/CurrentStyleProposals#gecks04|being discussed]] || [[User:Gecks|Gecks]] || -
|-
| RFC: change video game data cdroms from soundtrack to other || 2007-08-15 || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-August/005107.html post] [http://forums.musicbrainz.org/viewtopic.php?pid=2661 forum] || - || [[User:kuno/CurrentStyleProposals#kuno01|discussion resumed]] || [[User:kuno|kuno]] || -
|-
|-
| RFC: [[Classical Release Language|ClassicalReleaseLanguage]] || 2007-07-24 || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-July/005068.html post] [[Classical Release Language|wiki]] || - || [[User:kuno/CurrentStyleProposals#aaron03|no support]] || [[User:AaronCooper|AaronCooper]] || -
| RFC: [[Classical Release Language|ClassicalReleaseLanguage]] || 2007-07-24 || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-July/005068.html post] [[Classical Release Language|wiki]] || - || [[User:kuno/CurrentStyleProposals#aaron03|no support]] || [[User:AaronCooper|AaronCooper]] || -
Line 47: Line 45:
|}
|}


<span id="gecks04"></span>
<span id="misc01"></span>
===Audio Book Style===
==RFC: Don't allow/disable additions of ARs and release data Pseudo-Releases==


<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">Some discussion took place, but it seems no member of the [[Style Council|StyleCouncil]] actively listens to audio books themselves, which I fear makes progress on this issue '''VERY''' slow.
new rfc.
</ul>


<span id="kuno01"></span>
<span id="gecks04"></span>
===RFC: Don't allow/disable additions of ARs and release data Pseudo-Releases===
==RFC: change video game data cdroms from soundtrack to other==


<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">new rfc.
Discussion has probably died out, needs to be summarized.
</ul>


<span id="aaron03"></span>
<span id="aaron03"></span>
==RFC: ClassicalReleaseLanguage==
===RFC: ClassicalReleaseLanguage===


Out of the people who voiced their opinion on this proposal, Alex Dupuy doesn't see the need for it and Olivier is not in favour. I assume this proposal has been abandoned due to lack of support.
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">Out of the people who voiced their opinion on this proposal, Alex Dupuy doesn't see the need for it and Olivier is not in favour. I assume this proposal has been abandoned due to lack of support.
</ul>


<span id="aaron02"></span>
<span id="aaron02"></span>
==RFC: Classical works for multiple instruments==
===RFC: Classical works for multiple instruments===


Only three people participated in the discussion, with no clear support for the proposal. I expect the author has abandoned the proposal, but please correct me if I am wrong --kuno.
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">Only three people participated in the discussion, with no clear support for the proposal. I expect the author has abandoned the proposal, but please correct me if I am wrong --kuno.
</ul>


<span id="brianfr01"></span>
<span id="brianfr01"></span>
==RFC: Change Default Data Quality==
===RFC: Change Default Data Quality===


No consensus was reached on the actual proposal in its original form. However, a lot of valuable suggestions were made by various people, the proposal should probably be rewritten to take those suggestions into account and resubmitted as an RFC.
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">No consensus was reached on the actual proposal in its original form. However, a lot of valuable suggestions were made by various people, the proposal should probably be rewritten to take those suggestions into account and resubmitted as an RFC. (IMO, [[User:DonRedman|DonRedman]] has an insightful [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-July/005067.html post on the proposal]. --kuno).
</ul>

(IMO, [[User:DonRedman|DonRedman]] has an insightful [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-July/005067.html post on the proposal]. --kuno).


<span id="gecks02"></span>
<span id="gecks02"></span>
==RFC: Adding {instrument} and {vocals} to 'Recorded By' AR==
===RFC: Adding {instrument} and {vocals} to 'Recorded By' AR===


Discussion died, no clear consensus reached as far as i can see. No summary of the discussion.
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">Discussion died, no clear consensus reached as far as i can see. No summary of the discussion.
</ul>


<span id="bogdan03"></span>
<span id="bogdan03"></span>
==RFC: "changed name to" AR==
===RFC: "changed name to" AR===


In general, people seemed to be in favour of this proposal -- but concerned that the AR will be abused to split up artists which wouldn't be split up without the AR. The discussion died out, wasn't summarized or otherwise followed up later.
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">In general, people seemed to be in favour of this proposal -- but concerned that the AR will be abused to split up artists which wouldn't be split up without the AR. The discussion died out, wasn't summarized or otherwise followed up later.
</ul>


<span id="gecks01"></span>
<span id="gecks01"></span>
==RFC: Reissue Produced By" and "Compilation Produced By==
===RFC: Reissue Produced By" and "Compilation Produced By===


No discussion took place. No further action was taken.
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">No discussion took place. No further action was taken.
</ul>


<span id="bogdan02"></span>
<span id="bogdan02"></span>
==RFC: performance dates and locations==
===RFC: performance dates and locations===


Discussion has died on the [[Mailing List|MailingList]] and died or slowed down on the wiki pages. I don't see a clear consensus yet on the implementation details.
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">Discussion has died on the [[Mailing List|MailingList]] and died or slowed down on the wiki pages. I don't see a clear consensus yet on the implementation details.
</ul>


<span id="bogdan01"></span>
<span id="bogdan01"></span>
==RFC: instrument-related AR changes==
===RFC: instrument-related AR changes===


No discussion took place. No further action was taken.
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">No discussion took place. No further action was taken.
</ul>


<span id="luks02"></span>
<span id="luks02"></span>
==RFC: Conductor AR Changes==
===RFC: Conductor AR Changes===


Discussion died. There seem to be no objections to the proposal, however the discussion was not summarized nor do I see an RFV for the proposal.
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">Discussion died. There seem to be no objections to the proposal, however the discussion was not summarized nor do I see an RFV for the proposal.
</ul>


<span id="kilu01"></span>
<span id="kilu01"></span>
==RFC: IMDb AR change==
===RFC: IMDb AR change===


<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">No discussion took place. UPDATE: Yay, artysmokes is the first to reply, only 4 months after the initial post :)
No discussion took place.
</ul>

UPDATE: Yay, artysmokes is the first to reply, only 4 months after the initial post :)


<span id="panda01"></span>
<span id="panda01"></span>
==RFC: Bad Terminology: bootleg==
===RFC: Bad Terminology: bootleg===


Apparently enough consensus was reached to prepare the wiki for changes: [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004841.html http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004841.html] , but looking at the history, no actual changes were made.
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">Apparently enough consensus was reached to prepare the wiki for changes: [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004841.html http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004841.html] , but looking at the history, no actual changes were made.
</ul>


<span id="aaron01"></span>
<span id="aaron01"></span>
==RFC: New Release Status: "Upcoming"==
===RFC: New Release Status: "Upcoming"===


Consensus reached according to [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004726.html http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004726.html] , see also [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004840.html http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004840.html] . No further work seems to have been done on this after the initial consensus was reached.
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">Consensus reached according to [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004726.html http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004726.html] , see also
</ul>


[http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004840.html http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004840.html] . No further work seems to have been done on this after the initial consensus was reached.
Related activity: [[Not Yet Released Releases|NotYetReleasedReleases]]
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">Related activity: [[Not Yet Released Releases|NotYetReleasedReleases]] Also, I ''think'' the issue of upcoming releases was also discussed on the style mailinglist within the context of Data Quality (setting upcoming releases to low data quality), but cannot find the thread right now --kuno.

</ul>
Also, I ''think'' the issue of upcoming releases was also discussed on the style mailinglist within the context of Data Quality (setting upcoming releases to low data quality), but cannot find the thread right now --kuno.


<span id="gecks03"></span>
<span id="gecks03"></span>
==x (disc 1) & x (disc 2), vs x & x (bonus disc)==
===x (disc 1) & x (disc 2), vs x & x (bonus disc)===

The proposed changes to [[Bonus Disc|BonusDisc]] were first discussed and written in may 2006, amended in september 2006, and a call for further discussion in may 2007 (with no responses). Some issues raised in the september discussion and on the wiki page haven't been addressed by the proposal.


<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">The proposed changes to [[Bonus Disc|BonusDisc]] were first discussed and written in may 2006, amended in september 2006, and a call for further discussion in may 2007 (with no responses). Some issues raised in the september discussion and on the wiki page haven't been addressed by the proposal. RFV has been posted now.
RFV has been posted now.
</ul>


=Old Style Proposals=
=Old Style Proposals=
Line 138: Line 145:
|-
|-
| '''Summary''' || '''Date''' || '''Full Proposal''' || '''RFV''' || '''Current Status''' || '''[[Idea Champion|IdeaChampion]]''' || '''Developer'''
| '''Summary''' || '''Date''' || '''Full Proposal''' || '''RFV''' || '''Current Status''' || '''[[Idea Champion|IdeaChampion]]''' || '''Developer'''
|-
| RFC: change video game data cdroms from soundtrack to other || 2007-08-15 || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-August/005107.html post] [http://forums.musicbrainz.org/viewtopic.php?pid=2661 forum] || - || [[User:kuno/CurrentStyleProposals#kuno01|discussion resumed]] || [[User:kuno|kuno]] || -
|-
|-
| RFV: new vocal type - "rap" || 2007-08-15 || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-August/005103.html post] || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-August/005122.html post] [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-August/005123.html veto] || [[User:kuno/CurrentStyleProposals#luks03|vetoed]] || [[User:LukasLalinsky|LukasLalinsky]] || -
| RFV: new vocal type - "rap" || 2007-08-15 || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-August/005103.html post] || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-August/005122.html post] [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-August/005123.html veto] || [[User:kuno/CurrentStyleProposals#luks03|vetoed]] || [[User:LukasLalinsky|LukasLalinsky]] || -
Line 143: Line 152:
| RFV: "has a blog at" AR || 2007-05-01 || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004725.html post] || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004741.html post] || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-August/005128.html implemented] || [[User:LukasLalinsky|LukasLalinsky]] || -
| RFV: "has a blog at" AR || 2007-05-01 || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004725.html post] || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004741.html post] || [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-August/005128.html implemented] || [[User:LukasLalinsky|LukasLalinsky]] || -
|}
|}

<span id="kuno01"></span>
===RFC: change video game data cdroms from soundtrack to other===

<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">No consensus, RFC dropped.
</ul>


<span id="luks03"></span>
<span id="luks03"></span>
==RFC: new vocal type - "rap"==
===RFC: new vocal type - "rap"===


Vetoed because we do not have a clear definition of what rap is.
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">Vetoed because we do not have a clear definition of what rap is.
</ul>


[[Category:Proposal]] [[Category:Development]]
[[Category:Proposal]] [[Category:Development]]

Revision as of 16:05, 2 September 2007


Current Style Proposals

This page is an attempt to list all 'current' or 'active' proposals on the StyleMailingList. Often, proposals do reach some sort of consensus, but are never followed up on, the goal of this page is to keep track of those proposals so they are not forgotten, and can be revisited at the appropriate time.

Formal RFCs on the StyleMailingList are tracked here, no other proposals should be added.

NOTE: the current name and location kuno/CurrentStyleProposals should change at some point, i would like some suggestions on what this page should be called (just leave comments here or tell me on irc :).

Disclaimer: this is not an automated list, but I will try to keep it up to date. If you think some information is out of date or incorrect, notify me (warp on irc, or kuno@frob.nl) and I will look into it (or, change it yourself, this is a wiki :).

Summary Date Full Proposal RFV Current Status IdeaChampion Developer
RFC: Don't allow/disable additions of ARs and release 2007-08-28 post - being discussed Gecks -
RFC: ClassicalReleaseLanguage 2007-07-24 post wiki - no support AaronCooper -
RFC: Classical works for multiple instruments 2007-06-29 post - no support AaronCooper -
RFC: Change Default Data Quality 2007-06-19 post wiki - no consensus BrianFreud -
RFC: Adding {instrument} and {vocals} to 'Recorded By' AR 2007-05-21 post - discussion died Gecks -
RFC: "changed name to" AR 2007-05-07 post - discussion died Bogdanb -
RFC: Reissue Produced By" and "Compilation Produced By 2007-05-06 post - no discussion Gecks -
RFC: performance dates and locations 2007-05-03 post wiki wiki trac - discussion died Bogdanb -
RFC: instrument-related AR changes 2007-05-03 post - no discussion Bogdanb -
RFC: Conductor AR Changes 2007-05-03 post - discussion died LukasLalinsky -
RFC: IMDb AR change 2007-05-01 post post - resurrected Kilu -
RFC: Bad Terminology: bootleg 2007-04-24 post - consensus? dmppanda -
RFC: New Release Status: "Upcoming" 2007-04-14 post - consensus AaronCooper -
x (disc 1) & x (disc 2), vs x & x (bonus disc) 2006-05-03 post revisit revisit post RFV Gecks -
Audio Book Style predates 2005-07-23 wiki post - discussion died? WolfSong, Keschte -

Audio Book Style

  • Some discussion took place, but it seems no member of the StyleCouncil actively listens to audio books themselves, which I fear makes progress on this issue VERY slow.

RFC: Don't allow/disable additions of ARs and release data Pseudo-Releases

  • new rfc.

RFC: ClassicalReleaseLanguage

  • Out of the people who voiced their opinion on this proposal, Alex Dupuy doesn't see the need for it and Olivier is not in favour. I assume this proposal has been abandoned due to lack of support.

RFC: Classical works for multiple instruments

  • Only three people participated in the discussion, with no clear support for the proposal. I expect the author has abandoned the proposal, but please correct me if I am wrong --kuno.

RFC: Change Default Data Quality

  • No consensus was reached on the actual proposal in its original form. However, a lot of valuable suggestions were made by various people, the proposal should probably be rewritten to take those suggestions into account and resubmitted as an RFC. (IMO, DonRedman has an insightful post on the proposal. --kuno).

RFC: Adding {instrument} and {vocals} to 'Recorded By' AR

  • Discussion died, no clear consensus reached as far as i can see. No summary of the discussion.

RFC: "changed name to" AR

  • In general, people seemed to be in favour of this proposal -- but concerned that the AR will be abused to split up artists which wouldn't be split up without the AR. The discussion died out, wasn't summarized or otherwise followed up later.

RFC: Reissue Produced By" and "Compilation Produced By

  • No discussion took place. No further action was taken.

RFC: performance dates and locations

  • Discussion has died on the MailingList and died or slowed down on the wiki pages. I don't see a clear consensus yet on the implementation details.

RFC: instrument-related AR changes

  • No discussion took place. No further action was taken.

RFC: Conductor AR Changes

  • Discussion died. There seem to be no objections to the proposal, however the discussion was not summarized nor do I see an RFV for the proposal.

RFC: IMDb AR change

  • No discussion took place. UPDATE: Yay, artysmokes is the first to reply, only 4 months after the initial post :)

RFC: Bad Terminology: bootleg

RFC: New Release Status: "Upcoming"

http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2007-May/004840.html . No further work seems to have been done on this after the initial consensus was reached.

  • Related activity: NotYetReleasedReleases Also, I think the issue of upcoming releases was also discussed on the style mailinglist within the context of Data Quality (setting upcoming releases to low data quality), but cannot find the thread right now --kuno.

x (disc 1) & x (disc 2), vs x & x (bonus disc)

  • The proposed changes to BonusDisc were first discussed and written in may 2006, amended in september 2006, and a call for further discussion in may 2007 (with no responses). Some issues raised in the september discussion and on the wiki page haven't been addressed by the proposal. RFV has been posted now.

Old Style Proposals

Vetoed or otherwise abandoned, canceled or retired proposals go here. These should be moved to a separate page when the list becomes too big.

Summary Date Full Proposal RFV Current Status IdeaChampion Developer
RFC: change video game data cdroms from soundtrack to other 2007-08-15 post forum - discussion resumed kuno -
RFV: new vocal type - "rap" 2007-08-15 post post veto vetoed LukasLalinsky -
RFV: "has a blog at" AR 2007-05-01 post post implemented LukasLalinsky -

RFC: change video game data cdroms from soundtrack to other

  • No consensus, RFC dropped.

RFC: new vocal type - "rap"

  • Vetoed because we do not have a clear definition of what rap is.