Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1  Previous Next
|
|
Darkman Trilogy Boxset German Issue |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: January 5, 2009 |  Posts: 16 |
| | Posted: | | | | Good Morning all!
A week ago i made a contribution for the trilogy-boxset (metalbox) of Darkman 5-050582-514612. The trilogy itself is only a reissue of the individual films. Following the rules i tried to use the individual, already released UPCs. The rules say '...use the individual UPCs if they are available...' not differing if they are printed on the individual box nor being known because of the sheer existence in the database.
Finally - a week later my contribution earned one NO-vote and has been declined.
But - am i really wrong with Point of view?
Can please anyone point out what the rules really mean? Does it really make sense to issue duplicate copies of individual discs based on disc-id? And this approach in addition to being already released by means of UPC?
Thanks for your help in advance! |
| | Registered: March 19, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | If the UPCs don't show anywhere on the packaging of the individual movies in your box set, you can't use them for this particular release and you'll have to use the Disc ID. The point being: the UPCs you used belong to a different release than the one you own. However I do understand your frustration. Over the years, many users have asked to modify the program in the sense that it would use generic information on the movie on the one hand (so that it would have to be entered only once for all releases of the same movie), and specific information on specific releases on the other hand. This would require a major overhaul of the program and its database structure and so far nothing has come of it. In the mean time the easiest way you can deal with situations like this is to create (new) child profiles by disc ID for the individual movies and copy the generic movie data from existing profiles for the same movies. This process is called cloning. |
| | Registered: January 5, 2009 | | Posts: 16 |
| | Posted: | | | | Thanks for your answer. Finally - i'm not alone with my sight of things.
And what will happen when the same Releases will be repacked in a slip cover? How can the DB cope with a duplicate disc-id with for example two completely different overviews? does this work?
regards, j! |
| | Registered: March 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | . | | | | Last edited: by dee1959jay |
| | Registered: March 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | At present the central database is unable to handle such a situation. It only has two identifiers for profiles: UPC and Disc ID - one of each per locality ( country of release). Usually the oldest release takes precedence.
All you can do then is change the data to match what you have and lock down the data fields in question in your local database. |
| | Registered: May 9, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 400 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting dee1959jay: Quote:
In the mean time the easiest way you can deal with situations like this is to create (new) child profiles by disc ID for the individual movies and copy the generic movie data from existing profiles for the same movies. This process is called cloning. Sorry, but i can't understand the problem of jobr. What he didn't say in his first post: There is no need to create child profiles - they exist. He wants to remove the (correct) child profiles with the disc IDs which already exists since years and wants to add (wrong) child profiles with EAN/UPCs from previous releases. This makes absolut no sense to me.  There are many profiles where no child profiles exists and there i can understand the try to add (wrong) childs. But in this case it's utter nonsense, sorry. | | | | Si on n'a pas ce qu'on aime, on doit aimer, ce qu'on a ! | | | | Last edited: by MickySpoon |
| | Registered: March 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | I was unaware that Disc ID-based profiles were already in place. In that case, of course they should stay. |
| | Registered: January 5, 2009 | | Posts: 16 |
| | Posted: | | | | To clarify - in my view there is no need to point out exactly. what difference does it make if i did it the one or other way?
My question is of genrell character for me. there is a fact about the rules i misunderstood - not me Feeling misunderstood. now i see clearly. nevertheless - both approaches make sense for themselves and i can understand the Argumentation about each of them. now i know the issue about it within the database and therefor it is the only one solution that all behave the same way.
in other words - what are the incorrect child profiles? there is only one solitude solution - it depends!
thanks for your understanding! | | | | Last edited: by jobr |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 Previous Next
|
|
|