-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 194
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
album information on playlist tracks getting wrongly assigned on collaborative playlists #603
Comments
Hi, this function is currently not tested in the context of collaborative playlists afaik. Contribution welcome. |
For collaborative playlists, For regular playlists it's: For albums it's So index of flexColumns shouldn't be hardcoded as it currently is. Maybe we could use |
I tried to reproduce the bug with my own non-collaborative and collaborative playlists. I had similar issues. Non-collaborative playlist worked fine. here's a partial response by
|
…aborative playlists (sigma67#603)
fixed by #612 thanks @czifumasa ! |
Describe the bug
if a playlist has multiple users adding tracks to it, then the user who added a track to the playlist is returned in the "album" field.
The correct album information of the track can then be found in the "views" field instead.
To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:
Additional context
see below two examples of unlisted playlists, one working fine, the other one having the described issue.
I was using ytmusicapi to import an entire playlist, that a friend and I were working on, into pandas dataframes to do some analytics just for fun and noticed the album names being just our usernames.
After further inspection I found the correct album name under "views" which confused me a little bit.
Then after trying out the code with another playlist(one without any collaboration) I realized, that it worked fine in that case, so I guess its the additional field that YT Music puts there.
This extra field also shows up in the browser once you invite other users to edit your playlist.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: