Upload to GPM fails because of missing rating [#15138]

[upD8R]

MM5 5.0.0.2126 running in Win 10 1809

I started testing the GPM integration, actually after some hints from @Barry4679 that MM5 now supports GPM. Basically, I just want to upload some playlists from MM to GPM. I uploaded my favorites yesterday without any issue. Today I wanted to add 2 additional playlists and I'm running into an issue.


It seems I can only upload songs which do have some kind of rating in MM. The first playlist is based on rating (everything with more than 2 stars), so I didn't run into this issue.

Thanks for your support!

[Ludek]

Thanks for reporting!

It is a regression in 2126, will be fixed in 2127 as https://www.ventismedia.com/mantis/view.php?id=15138

[upD8R]

Looking forward to test the next version.

Quick question anyway: In the past I used Google Music Manager to upload my whole library to GPM and and the sync of my playlist with MM5 triggered another upload of the songs contained in the playlist.
So I ended up to have some songs twice in GPM.

Can I avoid this with deleting my whole GPM library and only use MM5 (if it works again ) for uploading/syncing to GPM?

Thanks!

[JimPa]

That's what I did when I started using MM5's GPM sync recently - I just deleted my whole current library from GPM and uploaded fresh from MM5. I've only synced a few test playlists to begin with and I might wait until MM5 is out of beta until I do my whole library. To be honest, I've always found Google Music Manager to be a bit clunky and unreliable anyway.

[upD8R]

Sounds good, I already deleted my library in GPM and uploaded my fav playlist. So far, so good.

Unfortunately, I now miss a lot of Album Art, although it is properly embedded in the ID3 tags.

EDIT: Uploading a song to GPM through its web interface brings Album Art (same Album, 1 song with MM5, the other directly uploaded). So there must be something odd in the way MM5 uploads this to GPM?

[Barry4679]

Quick question anyway: In the past I used Google Music Manager to upload my whole library to GPM and and the sync of my playlist with MM5 triggered another upload of the songs contained in the playlist.
So I ended up to have some songs twice in GPM.

Can I avoid this with deleting my whole GPM library and only use MM5 (if it works again ) for uploading/syncing to GPM?

They recently added an option to stop MM from creating duplicates when it was unable to tag match your GPM to local track copies.
See illustration; uncheck this to stop MM from creating NEW entries in your MM db (ie. tracks which they were unable to tag match to tracks in your GPM library, or tracks that are only in your GPM library).
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5aa2a1fqdbrby ... s.png?dl=0

This way you can use MM5 to sync MM tpo GPM, without creating duplicates, and without poluting your MM db with any unwanted junk in your GPM library.

The next version of MM5 should include facility allowing you see which of your MM tracks were not tag matched to a GPM track. ... You could use that to alter tags in either MM or GPM, and then resync to mop up the items missed on the first run.

Now that MM have implemented this new (no duplicates) option, it will be easier to analyse the generic causes of the mismatches, and they may be able to tune things to avoid a chunk of them.

To be honest, I've always found Google Music Manager to be a bit clunky and unreliable anyway.

Clearing your GPM library, and then using MM5 to rerun the upload should be the best and simpliest approach.

However it may not suit people who have already used the Google Music manager to upload a large collection.
The job took me so many days the first time, and had to managed, to remain within the monthly data cap of my Internet plan ... not at all keen to do it again.

It is good that MM have done the extra work to enhance their GPM integration, to have tools which enable keeping your existing GPM library with minimal hassle.

I found the Google Music Manager to be OK:
1. You can throttle the amount of bandwidth that it will seize
2. It seems to to minimise the upload task, by using their own track copy where they have one that matches your (major) tags ... some people report that their Google "copy" is of higher resolution than their own copy.
3. It can be paused when you approach your Internet cap, and can be restarted once the monthly plan rolls over
4. It does no cause MM UI to lag during the lengthy upload task
5. It is auto-started ... sits there waiting for you to add more content to your music location, and auto-runs the upload according to your upload config settings

It has some problems, but MM seems to share the largest of these problems; ie, next-to-no or inadequate logging of upload progress and incidents.

[upD8R]

Thanks for the hints, Barry.

M% is a complex piece of SW and I still learn how and where to look for specific information and settings, so any help is appreciated.
I also had almost 20k songs uploaded with Music Manager but I cleaned it to do some proper testing.
What I don't like about GPM: for whatever reason it overrides my given Genres. Something I haven't tested with MM5 yet.

[Barry4679]

You can stop MM5 from syncing GPM tags (including Genre) back into your MM db.
see the bottom checkbox on the image I posted earlier ... nb the bottom checkbox, not the one the one that the red arrow is pointing to.

btw they have uploaded a new version of MM5 today, but GPM integration seems completely broken.

[Barry4679]

btw they have uploaded a new version of MM5 today, but GPM integration seems completely broken.

Confirm now fixed by version 2128 uploaded today.

[pellenys]

If it's of any use to someone, I still get this error message with some tracks when syncing to GPM with 2128. If there's any debug logging support to help me identify which ones, I'm happy to switch it on and provide more info.

[Ludek]

Hi, are you saying that you are still getting the "track.rating of type enum: 0 (not a valid enum value)" ?
Or it is a different error? Can you spell the error exactly or attach a screenshot of the error message?

Otherwise standard log generated using DbgView (item 4b here: viewtopic.php?f=30&t=86643 ) could show more.

EDIT: Also, did you install the build 2128 into different folder or to the same folder where 2127 was? Maybe it happened that the script file (/scripts/googleMusicUploader/helpers/cloudServices_add.js) didn't get replaced for some reason (resulting in the same error as in build 2127)? In 2127 the bug appeared for all unrated tracks.

[pellenys]

Hi. Yep it's the same error. I installed another copy of 2128 and diffed the directories: cloudServices_add.js is the same.

I may have completely misinterpreted the code - so apologies if so - but I added a _showError call to where it looked relevant and the sync hit the line commented below (__fillMetadata, quoted here starting at line 522):

Code: Select all

if (track.rating <= -1) { // unknown
            // md.rating = 0; // don't assign anything!, otherwise 'not a valid enum value' would appear (0, undefined, null) - #15138
        } else
        if (track.rating == 0)
            md.rating = 1;
        else {
            md.rating = Math.round(track.rating / 20);
            if (md.rating < 1) {
               // Added a __showError call. The code definitely gets here
            }
        }

I looked at one of the offending tracks and the track rating tag value was 2. No idea how it got that way - I've read how MediaMonkey and others assign rating values and it's obviously not in keeping with a 0-100 scale, so my library has duff rating values.

Wondering if - for garbage tolerance - something like this is a viable fix maybe ...

Code: Select all

if (track.rating <= -1) { // unknown
            // md.rating = 0; // don't assign anything!, otherwise 'not a valid enum value' would appear (0, undefined, null) - #15138
        } else
        if (track.rating == 0)
            md.rating = 1;
        else {
            var gpm_rating = Math.round(track.rating / 20);
            if (gpm_rating >= 1) 
                md.rating = gpm_rating;
        }
        

[Ludek]

Hi
thanks for the great analyzing and debugging!

Yes, this makes perfect sense, I'll fix it for the next version.

Thanks again.