[mb-users] an album has to have bonus tracks to be a remaster?

[Jan van Thiel]

On 10/3/06, Frederic Da Vitoria <davitofrg at gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree we don't really know if the PUIDs would be different (if a MB user
> has both an original and a remaster, maybe she/he could tell). If they don't
> differ, then the distinction is meaningless. But if they are different, then
> it is important. If we merge the PUIDs now, we won't have any way to
> re-separate them when we enter NGS (we won't even know if an old-style MB
> release contains PUIDs from different masterings or not). But if we separate
> them now and later discover that the PUIDs are identical (and that the
> distinction can be considered as meaningless), then we sill still be able to
> merge the releases. Furthermore, it will be easy to track such "problems" by
> browsing the remaster ARs.

A a person who has cleaned up *a lot* of PUIDs recently, I can say
most tagging people don't give a damn to which release they tag
against. They probably just select the first search result, not even
bothering to see if it's a live release, an album or something else.
Trust me, if we do split up remasters and originals, PUIDs will be a
mess within months and it will be unclear to which release it really
belongs.

I think the same will happen with disc ids, but on a very small scale.

-- 
Jan van Thiel