Re: [mb-users] Balance engineer
Frederic Da Vitoria <[email protected]> Sun, 26 Jan 2014 12:57:05 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CANe_y9Q2oa5GYfkLfPzKiUbup+-hLnn0RQxprdnC9sfYL=3idA@mail.gmail.com> |
2014/1/26 Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen <[email protected]> > Den 26-01-2014 03:32, Frederic Da Vitoria skrev: > > IIUC adding the balance engineer would mean at least some modifications > > in the code, right? > > Did I miss something in the discussion? Isn't "balance engineer" just > another relationship to (possibly) be added as a child of the "engineer" > relationship? If so, no code modifications should be needed. > No you didn't, I hadn't slept enough yesterday :-P One last question: I found http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/History:Tonmeister_Relationship_Type and http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Balance_Engineer_Relationship_Type . Which means that at one point, some users found it necessary to distinguish between them. I am not sure this is a good idea. I have a few releases which use balance engineer and Tonmeister as translations of each other. So should we create a common AR for both or should we keep them separated? -- Frederic Da Vitoria (davitof) Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users