Frederic Da Vitoria | 30 Jun 14:24

Re: [mb-users] Future of this mailing list

From a new user's point of veiw, I agree: forums are probably the best option, they are more focused, allow better searching / browsing, are clearer to read...

But, don't forget the people who answer, old-timers or not. I don't have any problem asking something on a forum. But answering to a forum is another matter. Let's use a small example:

  1. newUser asks question A
  2. oldUser1 receives the feed and decides that he has no answer to offer.
  3. oldUser2 has an answer and posts it (PunBB does not send anything to users who have not subscribed to the thread)
  4. newUser raises a new question because he did not understand everything in oldUser2's answer (PunBB does not send anything to users who have not subscribed to the thread)
This is where the current system does not work IMO. oldUser1 may have something to say now, but he will never know it, because PunBB sends a feed only when a new thread is created. So we arrive to the current situation, where mainly 2 or 3 forum freaks (no offence meant either) answer almost all the questions.

So we'd need either to switch to another forum which offers full feed (RSS/Atom or mail) or find a plugin for PunBB to correct the issue.

2009/6/30 Jeroen van den Brink <Jeroen <at> v-d-brink.eu>
My vote goes for closing down the mailinglist and go to the forums.
Apart from the regulars here that are used to mailinglists, I believe a
(very) large portion of general users are not familiar with
mailinglists. Many sites offer forums for their discussions, so the
concept of a forum is usually very familiar to most people. I therefore
also believe it would be easier for a normal/new user to go to a forum
for questions as opposed to subscribing to a mailinglist. And this being
a user support list/forum, I believe the focus should be to help these
newer users, and not use what the "old-timers" are used to (no offense
intended of course).

It would be even better I think if we could integrate the users of the
main site to the forums, so you don't have to create a new account for
the forums. This would lower the barrier for new users to access the
forums. But I do understand this can be challenging from a technical
perspective.

Furthermore, I think it would be wise to close the mailinglist, or at
least merge it with the forums, since I think MusicBrainz currently has
way to many communication channels. It's very hard for a new user to
find the correct information he is looking for since there are way too
many places to discuss stuff (e.g., the mailinglist (/nabble), the
forums, IRC, discussion pages on the Wiki, bugtracker, uservoice,
whatnot). This I why I also wouldn't use yet another service like Google
groups, unless everything can be hosted there (and it would become yet
another additional means of communication).

Regards,
Jeroen (MightyJay)

Nikolai Prokoschenko wrote:
> Dear MusicBrainz users,
>
> as you know, there is an ongoing effort to reorganize and simplify user
> support at MusicBrainz. One of the usual suspects are mailing lists as
> opposed to forums -- many users are confused as to where
> they should ask for help. It has been noted that only one of the mailing
> lists has any relevance for the users (this one), all the others are
> relevant either for developers or customers.
>
> A proposal has been made about moving all user-relevant discussion to
> the forums at http://forums.musicbrainz.org. However, nobody wished to
> close this mailing list without hearing what its inhabitants think of
> this idea first, so here it comes:
>
> 1. What do you think in general of putting user support at one place at
> forums and shutting down musicbrainz-users mailing list?
>
> 2. Do you see any technical or usability reasons against using the
> forums?

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users <at> lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
Nikolai Prokoschenko | 29 Jun 21:41

[mb-users] Future of this mailing list

Dear MusicBrainz users,

as you know, there is an ongoing effort to reorganize and simplify user
support at MusicBrainz. One of the usual suspects are mailing lists as
opposed to forums -- many users are confused as to where
they should ask for help. It has been noted that only one of the mailing
lists has any relevance for the users (this one), all the others are
relevant either for developers or customers.

A proposal has been made about moving all user-relevant discussion to
the forums at http://forums.musicbrainz.org. However, nobody wished to
close this mailing list without hearing what its inhabitants think of
this idea first, so here it comes:

1. What do you think in general of putting user support at one place at
forums and shutting down musicbrainz-users mailing list? 

2. Do you see any technical or usability reasons against using the
forums?

Thank you for your replies.

Nikolai.
Rick Spillane | 9 Jun 01:04

[mb-users] added tracks, but can't find them

I am using Sound Juicer in Ubuntu and after I clicked 'Submit Album',
entered the data into the website at Music Brainz, and then closed
Sound Juicer, ejected and re-inserted the CD, Sound Juicer still can't
find the track info.  What good is it to submit track info if my
client can't get the data for my own collection?

The title was 'Jerry Willard PLAYS!', and the artist was 'Jerry
Willard'.  When searching the DB for 'Jerry Willard', no dice.

--

-- 

Rick
necro351 <at> gmail.com
Eric Shattow | 5 Jun 12:31

[mb-users] Extending MusicBrainz to hold audio checksums

How can we extend MusicBrainz so that people ripping digital media may verify their audio content is correctly media-shifted from audio CD sources?

There is a higher challenge here. Reading CD audio is an inexact science:

- Labels may release multiple pressings of the same content, leading to the same audio at slightly differing sample offsets
- Consumer CD drives are not consistent at which sample offset they start reading from
- No drive on the market can reliably detect all errors when reading audio from CD media

If we can store file audio data checksums in a meaningful way, should we?

Possible approach:

1) No "zero" reference. Cover all possible read offsets given drives available on the market today. Make a lot of SHA-1 checksums (3072 count) per track, and per album. This amounts to be 33KiB * (num tracks + 1) of checksum data per release. This has the benefit of working without drive calibration, as most CD pressings contain no useful data in the missing samples (which is like maximum 5 sectors i.e. 5/72 of a second audio). Drawbacks are the required time to compute checksums and the nearly 400KiB of checksum data per release.

2) Above but with a "zero" reference. Maintain a list of approved "zero offset" drives (I own such a drive, the Plextor PX-712SA). This differs from the AccurateRip(TM) method by 30 samples. Checksums stored in the database will be moderated and voted on by persons submitting from approved hardware only. This reduces the data storage requirement to less than 5KiB per release. Client verification software is still tasked with heavy computational load to generate all possible checksums as described in method #1

3) Guess what the actual audio content is for the release and cover all possible read offsets for the release's audio content as a whole. It would also have some kind of "inner checksum" calculated at offset from the start and finish of useful audio. Required storage is less than 70KiB per release.

This concept of verifying CD audio rips does kind of walk the line between what does and does not apply to the purpose of MusicBrainz database.

Thoughts? Comments welcomed.

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users <at> lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
Atedos | 26 May 15:43

[mb-users] Change to full listing

After new server release, is there any way to make releases in RG be shown at full listing by default.

Now they are shown as compact one.
Previously there was an option, when to show compact listing, and it was set to me by 1 (more than 1 album goes to compact list).
Now there is no such option, and I wonder if there is any way to change it, or am I just "frozen" with an old parameter having no ability to change it?
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users <at> lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
Bram van Dijk | 26 May 10:10
Favicon

[mb-users] release group for Abbatoir blues / The lyre of Orpheus

Hi
 
Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds released a double album in 2004 for which one disc was titled "Abbatoir Blues" and the other "The Lyre of Orpheus".
See http://musicbrainz.org/release-group/f0ffb9ec-fcb5-3e03-9a1b-3f018472d831.html and http://musicbrainz.org/release-group/6a46ce57-f092-3715-95b1-cb21dd28e6b8.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abattoir_Blues/The_Lyre_of_Orpheus.
 
As they were only released together, they seem to beling into a common release group.
However, if I want to merge them, I must choose if I want to merge them into an "Abbatoir Blues" group or a "The Lyre of Orpheus" group, which kind of seems to defeat the purpose.
 
So, what to do?
Wait untill we can give new names to releas groups, or merge them anyway?
 
Bram / jongetje

What can you do with the new Windows Live? Find out
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users <at> lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
Grant | 25 May 17:10

[mb-users] Original release date?

Does MBz have the functionality to record the original release date of
an album so that it can be included in a FLAC tag?

- Grant
Aurélien Mino | 22 May 09:40
Favicon

[mb-users] TransclusionEditors (and others): Help needed for preparing the WikiDocs move from MoinMoin to MediaWiki

The current transclusion table 
(http://musicbrainz.org/edit/wikitransclusion/transclusion.html) holds 
only MoinMoin revisions, and need to be updated for MediaWiki which uses 
different revisions.

I've created a wikipage to prepare the new transclusion table which is 
going to be used by Rob during the setup of the next server release due 
on May 24th, 2009:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:murdos/wikitrans-index

But I'm sure I can finish that myself, so your help is welcome.

Thanks!

- Aurélien
Grant | 16 May 16:51

[mb-users] DVD-Audio?

Should DVD-Audio discs be entered like normal CDs except for the
release event type?

- Grant
Lukáš Lalinský | 10 May 12:14

[mb-users] Release packaging types in NGS

Hi,
I need help with compiling a list of types of release packaging used
in NGS ("Jewel Case", "Digipak", etc.). Optical discs are quite well
covered by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_disc_packaging but
what about other formats? If you can think of anything, can you please
add here - http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Next_Generation_Schema/Release_Packaging
?

Thanks,

--

-- 
Lukas Lalinsky
lalinsky <at> gmail.com
Andrew John Hughes | 8 May 02:29
Gravatar

[mb-users] Moulin Rouge and featured artists

Hi all,

I've just been looking at the two Moulin Rouge soundtrack releases:

http://musicbrainz.org/release/9fce131b-381e-4588-844d-d113db2e3d76.html
http://musicbrainz.org/album/4088668e-a85f-4891-823e-f8badecf514c.html

Without going into the mess that seems to have been created by
duplicating the discs (they were released separately, and then as a
package, which seems to have caused some confusion), there seems to be
some strangeness going on with the artist attributions as well.

On the releases themselves, there are no featured artists.  Tracks are
attributed to one or more performers, which gets a bit crazy in some
cases (Spectacular Spectacular on Moulin Rouge 2 has eight
collaborating artists).  When these releases were added, they seem to
have been arbitrarily attributed to whoever occurs first in the list
(Nicole Kidman in most cases) and the rest listed as featured artist.
Is there some guideline for doing this?  In a number of cases it is
clearly incorrect; 'Elephant Love Medley' and 'Come What May' are both
duets and shouldn't be attributed solely to Nicole Kidman (especially
on the latter, as Ewan McGregor is the dominant performer).

How should this be corrected? Should we create appropriate track
artists (this will result in some awful pseudo-artists)?  Or is there
a better solution?

Thanks,
--

-- 
Andrew :-)

Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
http://openjdk.java.net

PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8

Gmane