Although which level of master should be employed will be an interesting debate if/when that begins
On 5 May 2013 19:50, LordSputnik <ben.s...@gmail.com> wrote: > That's an very specific case - I wouldn't add mastering information to > such a > release, and wouldn't expect others to until there's a better solution. > It's > likely that there will be a master entity at some point, or a better way of > using tracks between releases. > > However, this guideline has already passed, so any new mastering > information > being added should be at the release level as soon as it becomes the > official guideline. The recording remaster relationship type is effectively > already deprecated. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-STYLE-208-New-Recordings-Guidelines-tp4651054p4652499.html > Sent from the MusicBrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > MusicBrainz-style mailing list > MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style >
_______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
