[mb-style] [Clean up CSG] Box sets, aka, what defines a unique release?

[Chris B]

On 14/02/2008, Aaron Cooper <cooperaa at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13-Feb-08, at 7:36 AM, Chris B wrote:
>  > back to the proposal: i would say that we should allow all box sets to
>  > be added even if they are a subset of a larger box, UNLESS that box is
>  > just a box containing other, existing, boxes (bear with me) - in which
>  > case that's basically the same logic we apply to boxes that contain
>  > separately available items.
>  >
>  > eg
>  > - if the 180 set is a meta-package of 10x 10 disc volumes (with the
>  > same order), which are also available separately, then add them
>  > separately. if all the discs are available separately, then add no box
>  > sets.
>
>
> I wish we could just add box sets.  We're never going to have the
>  worst case scenario where every box set ever was added.  But if they
>  were, someone must have *REALLY* wanted to add them considering all
>  the work that would have had to gone into entering correct track
>  titles for 180 CDs!
>
>  How about we not worry about the duplication caused by box sets?
>  People who own individual CDs don't want box set release titles and
>  people who own box sets don't want individual release titles messing
>  up their box sets.  Why don't we just let people add both?  It's not
>  like they'd cause any harm.  There are already bazillions of releases
>  under each composer.
>
>  Can anyone think of a reason why we shouldn't allow both box sets and
>  individual discs?

then they should also be allowed to add all other releases separately,
since our release event system doesn't actually show all the info that
varies between identical tracklist releases.

either we index all unique releases (like discogs), or we index all
unique tracklistings (like we do now). i don't see the need for a
middle ground, but i see the benefits of both on their own.