[mb-style] policy on merging of recordings

Frederic Da Vitoria davitofrg at gmail.com
Mon Jul 11 08:13:11 UTC 2011


2011/7/11, Johannes Weißl <jargon at molb.org>:
> If you have good reasons to believe that they are the same recording (<5
> seconds time difference, same name, comment and artist), I would merge
> them. The situation for many artists is terrible, if so many (possibly
> identical) recordings exist they have lost any meaning / information at
> all. So the argument: "Don't merge, we loose information" doesn't really
> count.
>
> If later someone has proof that a recording on a release is different,
> it is easy to correct that (just create a new recording and relate the
> track to this one).

Not so easy in situations like the one described by lorenz. But I
agree correcting this would not be worse it the recordings are merged
than if they are not.

What we are about to create is a kind of catchall recording for these
situations where we don't have any way to decide which "master" was
really used. I suggest we find a way to distinguish those catchall
recordings from thoroughly verified recordings. We could indeed merge
all unverified recordings with same duration into those. Then, as
users with the relevant information start entering "good" recordings,
these catchall recordings would gradually lose links to tracks.

-- 
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

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



More information about the MusicBrainz-style mailing list