@neronick -
I am sorry, but to try to mix legal copyright matters (in german!) with a feature request (what Danny started here) does not make sense at all.
If you do not share HD single tracks, why do you worry about something that does not apply to you?
As Danny clarified further up, there is no legal problem about creating cross-branch-remixes, the wikiloops public license does cover that, as long as all participating musicians are named (which is what we are currently discussing here).
The license has never been changed from day 1 of wikiloops, just to clarify that as well.
I would appreciate if you could return to either silent readership, or asking answerable questions if you may have any. To give advice (or your opinion dressed as advice) on legal matters here is not called for at all, nor does it help find a good solution for the problem we are trying to solve here.
Now, back on topic...
I've been thinking a bit, and -inspired by TGs picture- I came up with another idea on how to describe our "case". What we are talking about is not really "cross branch", because the mixed tracks do not resemble whole branches, but may as well be a collection of single tracks taken from several branches (thats what I described as the second case earlier).
So, visualizing that, these mixes connections to certain parts of different branches
rather look like a spiders (cob-)web built between various branches, so calling them "spider-mixes" feels most suitable.
To display these correctly on the limited space of the standard remix tree view seems impossible, and the usefullness for navigation use would be very limited (people wouldn't understand that without explanation I'm affraid).
To me, it seems most reasonable not to attempt that, but go another way:
If spider mixes with non-linear heritage could be shared as a different kind of track template, they would be marked as "something special" right away, and the needed "name involved track IDs here" field could be offered only on that special template-upload case.
The involved tracks could be linked from the appearing track in a different way than the remix tree offers, and one would have another five remix steps available to follow the track (which has been another common reason to create such mixes). Notifying the participants would be no problem either.
Sometimes its better to keep things split in different categories, instead of offering too many options within one global category, so taking the "spider mixes" into a class of their own does seem better than mixing them in the branched linear remixing where they will only cause confusion.
I'm open to your thoughts on this, but to tell ou the truth this feature will not make it into the 9.0 update right away... :)