Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add releasegroupdisambig MediaField #20

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Moonbase59
Copy link

As discussed in the forum, add a proposed releasegroupdisambig ("MusicBrainz Release Group Comment") media field.

Copy link
Member

@sampsyo sampsyo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good overall! I note that your MB ticket has generated some discussion:
https://tickets.metabrainz.org/browse/PICARD-1617

To confirm what you've mentioned elsewhere, is it true that Picard does not yet have a tag mapping for this? If so, maybe we should wait to come to consensus about the tag mapping and do this in concert with the Picard people.

@@ -1843,6 +1843,14 @@ def update(self, dict):
StorageStyle('MUSICBRAINZ_ALBUMCOMMENT'),
ASFStorageStyle('MusicBrainz/Album Comment'),
)
releasegroupdisambig = MediaField(
# This tag mapping was invented for beets (not used by Picard, etc).
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe just say "As above." or something instead of duplicating the text?

@Moonbase59
Copy link
Author

Yes, I’d actually like you and Philipp Wolfer maybe get in sync (you could jump in on PICARD-1617) so this can get sorted once and for all. Be it even that both should be changed back, because MusicBrainz’ rules about tag naming have apparently been changed.

Of course, things have to start somewhere, so in this case I try to coordinate/make aware a little, because I think if we do it, it’s early enough to sync with other developers so users don’t experience uncontrollable tag proliferation. It would just be great if, say, beets, Picard, foobar2000 and Mp3tag would pick these up first, so that a large user base can be happy.

@Moonbase59
Copy link
Author

See current discussion in PICARD-1617.

@sampsyo: Do you think we should keep or change the albumdisambig and releasegroupdisambig names? The disambiguation is (can be) a "greater thing" than just the MusicBrainz Album/Release Group Comment.

@sampsyo
Copy link
Member

sampsyo commented Oct 9, 2019

Good question—sorry if I've lost track and the answer should be obvious, but what would we change them to? Are other tags in use by other software already?

@Moonbase59
Copy link
Author

Moonbase59 commented Oct 9, 2019

Just asking because MusicBrainz call those releasecomment and releasegroupcomment and the (complete) beets disambiguation string might be something more like "albumtype year label catalognum albumdisambig releasegroupdisambig".

So I was thinking of maybe albumcomment and releasegroupcomment or the like. But if that breaks anything, we’d better leave those alone?

@sampsyo
Copy link
Member

sampsyo commented Oct 9, 2019

Got it; I see what you're saying. It would indeed be a little tricky to get right in a backwards-compatible way… and the data (at least for beets) does literally come from something called a "disambiguation string." So maybe it's defensible to just leave it how it is for now, unless we run into a scenario where "comments" aside from these disambiguation strings become an important thing?

@Moonbase59
Copy link
Author

Ok, agreed. So let’s hope we get this tag naming thing finalized soon and proceed from there.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants