Re: tag editing

[Petteri Hintsanen]

Grant Shoshin Shangreaux <grant@churls.world> writes:

> i also still need to do the verification of tag updates after it
> happens. i'm working on writing up some ert tests to make it a bit
> easier to ensure, my plan was to generate some test audio files for the
> tag editor to operate on. i'm not sure if its practical to set up
> automated testing for EMMS at large, but at least on my local machine it
> will help me progress on this. please let me know if you have any
> thoughts about it :)

ERT tests are good idea I think.  I'm also planning to wrap at least
some of the tests I've used for testing emms-info-native into ERT test
cases.  The only real issue is copyright: all test data must have a
license that is GPL compatible.  I've used data from Mutagen
(https://github.com/quodlibet/mutagen) which is ok as it is under GPLv3,
but I still have to check other files.

> me. Petteri suggested that native writing may be a much bigger job than
> is worth it for Elisp, though that would be ideal (assuming it can
> manage to update precious files without error :) )

It is quite a job indeed, and the main culprit is MP3.  id3v2 tags have
lots of complications--even within a single id3v2.x spec version--so I'm
not that enthusiastic about writing them.

Vorbis-like comments are much easier so native writing for Ogg/FLAC/Opus
is probably feasible.  It would require some redesign of
emms-info-native but not prohibitively much.

I would still recommend to continue on your chosen track as it will
improve the state of the art, and (I think) we should have robust
support for external metadata writing tools.  I also think that it is
good idea to go ahead one step at a time; that is, first make sure that
the chosen tagger does not exit with error, and after that works,
validate the output like Yoni suggested.  Even the first step without
the second is better than the current state.

Thanks,
Petteri