From: coolnodje <coo...@gm...> - 2014-07-29 03:05:54
|
Hi, I've just discovered Gramps and I'm really exited about it. Ideally I'd like to share a Family Tree so that multiple users can work on it (not simultaneously of course). Import/Export seemed a natural way to do this, but after a few tests, I realized it's not really adapted for this purpose as it imports the archive content over the currently opened Family Tree. I was thinking I could share the Family Tree Database under 'grampsdb' but I feel that it's under a unique identifier that probably won't be taken into account by another install of Gramps. Now looking at what's in grampsdb, it feels like it's probaby where the right set of files to share is located: would sharing the content of the grampsdb/uniqueID make two instances of gramps be identical? Would that work? Is there any easier way? best regards |
From: Jerome <rom...@ya...> - 2014-07-29 12:52:46
|
Hi, We cannot really say that current ID are unique, despite the fact that gramps DB handles are close to this propriety, and are more robust than any simple textual ID. You can see some GRAMPS ID into editors. They are cosmetic! Gramps IDs (handles) are hidden. Most textual GRAMPS ID are inherited from others indexes (eg, gedcom file format), and only few are handled by external file formats or DB (csv, gedcom, etc ...). eg, Events, Places, Citations IDs are maybe ignored from export to others files formats than XML! On the other hand, only Gramps XML file format seems to support our internal handles. About uniqueID, you can look at some additional ideas/scripts[1] or the experimental webapp[2]! About sharing 'grampsdb', maybe you should first take care of possible issues! This could work if you use the same python/bsddb and gramps versions for all your clients. Should work whatever OS, but you can have some path issues around DB read and write under some OS. Also, some people are using dropbox. I remember having some issues with RAID environment in the past, but this was not related to gramps or 'grampsdb' path set. I did not get problems via owncloud under linux. [1] https://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=GEPS_009:_Import_Export_Merge [2] https://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=GEPS_013:_Gramps_Webapp best regards, Le mar. 29 juil. 2014 at 5:05, coolnodje <coo...@gm...> a écrit : > Hi, > > I've just discovered Gramps and I'm really exited about it. > > Ideally I'd like to share a Family Tree so that multiple users can > work > on it (not simultaneously of course). > > Import/Export seemed a natural way to do this, but after a few tests, > I > realized it's not really adapted for this purpose as it imports the > archive content over the currently opened Family Tree. > > I was thinking I could share the Family Tree Database under 'grampsdb' > but I feel that it's under a unique identifier that probably won't be > taken into account by another install of Gramps. > > Now looking at what's in grampsdb, it feels like it's probaby where > the > right set of files to share is located: would sharing the content of > the > grampsdb/uniqueID make two instances of gramps be identical? > > Would that work? > Is there any easier way? > > best regards > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Infragistics Professional > Build stunning WinForms apps today! > Reboot your WinForms applications with our WinForms controls. > Build a bridge from your legacy apps to the future. > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=153845071&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-users mailing list > Gra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users > |
From: coolnodje <coo...@gm...> - 2014-07-30 03:59:31
|
Hi, thanks for your answer, but it's not really helping me decide on how to share a Family Tree I was not speaking og GRAMPS ID, but of what seems to be a uniquely named folder inside /grampsdb. At first I thought I could simply share /grampsdb folder, but as there exists what seems to be a unique folder inside, I doubt another instance of Gramps would be able to read a copy of it. So are you confirming that copying the content of grampsdb/<ID folder>/*.*to another instance can work? best > Jerome <mailto:rom...@ya...> > 29 July 2014 20:50 > Hi, > > We cannot really say that current ID are unique, despite the fact that > gramps DB handles are close to this propriety, and are more robust > than any simple textual ID. > > You can see some GRAMPS ID into editors. > They are cosmetic! Gramps IDs (handles) are hidden. > > Most textual GRAMPS ID are inherited from others indexes (eg, gedcom > file format), and only few are handled by external file formats or DB > (csv, gedcom, etc ...). eg, Events, Places, Citations IDs are maybe > ignored from export to others files formats than XML! On the other > hand, only Gramps XML file format seems to support our internal handles. > > About uniqueID, you can look at some additional ideas/scripts[1] or > the experimental webapp[2]! > > About sharing 'grampsdb', maybe you should first take care of possible > issues! > This could work if you use the same python/bsddb and gramps versions > for all your clients. Should work whatever OS, but you can have some > path issues around DB read and write under some OS. Also, some people > are using dropbox. > > I remember having some issues with RAID environment in the past, but > this was not related to gramps or 'grampsdb' path set. I did not get > problems via owncloud under linux. > > [1] > https://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=GEPS_009:_Import_Export_Merge > > [2] > https://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=GEPS_013:_Gramps_Webapp > > > > best regards, > > > Le mar. 29 juil. 2014 at 5:05, coolnodje <coo...@gm...> a écrit > > coolnodje <mailto:coo...@gm...> > 29 July 2014 11:05 > Hi, > > I've just discovered Gramps and I'm really exited about it. > > Ideally I'd like to share a Family Tree so that multiple users can work > on it (not simultaneously of course). > > Import/Export seemed a natural way to do this, but after a few tests, I > realized it's not really adapted for this purpose as it imports the > archive content over the currently opened Family Tree. > > I was thinking I could share the Family Tree Database under 'grampsdb' > but I feel that it's under a unique identifier that probably won't be > taken into account by another install of Gramps. > > Now looking at what's in grampsdb, it feels like it's probaby where the > right set of files to share is located: would sharing the content of the > grampsdb/uniqueID make two instances of gramps be identical? > > Would that work? > Is there any easier way? > > best regards |
From: paul w. <pw...@pa...> - 2014-07-30 07:56:57
|
coolnodje wrote: > Hi, > > thanks for your answer, but it's not really helping me decide on how to share a Family Tree I do not think there is a way to allow multiple people write access to a gramps DB. Worse, I do not know of a way to reliably merge-together multiple copies of a gramps DB to combine work/edits. BugBear |
From: Enno B. <enn...@gm...> - 2014-07-30 11:43:02
|
Hi, > thanks for your answer, but it's not really helping me decide on how > to share a Family Tree Well, to tell you the truth, there is no better answer than Jerome's. > At first I thought I could simply share /grampsdb folder, but as there > exists what seems to be a unique folder inside, I doubt another > instance of Gramps would be able to read a copy of it. It will, provided that that other instance is the same version, with the same BSDDB, same Python, same OS, just like Jerome wrote. And even then, a simultaneous edit will likely corrupt your database. > So are you confirming that copying the content of grampsdb/<ID > folder>/*.*to another instance can work? Under above conditions, yes. You can also relocate grampsdb to a Dropbox folder, and then change the path in preferences. But even if you can avoid simultaneous editing somehow, there are quite a few dangers here, because when two persons make an edit in their copy of the database at different times, and their changes are not immediately synced, one person's database may still overwrite changes made in the other. To avoid that, you need to use an on-line database, which can be Gramps connect, but if you don't want to configure that, Ancestry may be a better choice. regards, Enno |
From: Ron J. <ron...@co...> - 2014-07-31 13:22:32
|
On 07/31/2014 07:16 AM, Guilherme Brondani Torri wrote: > On 7/30/14, 1:42 PM, Enno Borgsteede wrote: > >> But even if you can avoid simultaneous editing somehow, there are quite >> a few dangers here, because when two persons make an edit in their copy >> of the database at different times, and their changes are not >> immediately synced, one person's database may still overwrite changes >> made in the other. >> > Is not possible to add an optional locking mechanism into the Gramps > settings? > > Perhaps issue a warning that the database is/was in use by another person? > > Regards, Guilherme There already exists a "lock icon". Officially it is to indicate that someone else is using the tree, but on a system only used by one person you see it when Gramps crashes and did not shut down properly. -- My word, man! Don't you know your quantum statistics? |
From: paul w. <pw...@pa...> - 2014-07-31 13:33:55
|
Ron Johnson wrote: > > There already exists a "lock icon". Officially it is to indicate that > someone else is using the tree, but on a system only used by one person you > see it when Gramps crashes and did not shut down properly. Or if you're using a big, multi screen desktop and start up a second instance. BugBear (who may have done that...) |
From: Douglas B. <dou...@ca...> - 2014-07-31 17:53:56
|
On 31/07/14 14:33, paul womack wrote: > Ron Johnson wrote: > >> There already exists a "lock icon". Officially it is to indicate that >> someone else is using the tree, but on a system only used by one person you >> see it when Gramps crashes and did not shut down properly. > Or if you're using a big, multi screen desktop and start up a second instance. > > BugBear (who may have done that...) > On an OS that allows multiple workspaces you can start multiple instances of gramps on separate workspaces and open a (different) family tree on each. As you switch from one workspace to another you see that the tree on the last workspace gets locked (as are the trees on all the workspaces other than the current one). This feature is more of a curiosity than anything else, but on rare occasions it can be useful for comparing two trees. Doug |
From: Guilherme B. T. <gui...@gm...> - 2014-07-31 12:20:11
|
On 7/30/14, 1:42 PM, Enno Borgsteede wrote: > > But even if you can avoid simultaneous editing somehow, there are quite > a few dangers here, because when two persons make an edit in their copy > of the database at different times, and their changes are not > immediately synced, one person's database may still overwrite changes > made in the other. > Is not possible to add an optional locking mechanism into the Gramps settings? Perhaps issue a warning that the database is/was in use by another person? Regards, Guilherme |
From: Enno B. <enn...@gm...> - 2014-07-31 13:21:39
|
Guilherme, > Is not possible to add an optional locking mechanism into the Gramps > settings? > > Perhaps issue a warning that the database is/was in use by another > person? That mechanism already exists. When you start a second copy of Gramps, you will get a warning when you try to open the same database with that, and if you want, you can open another one. Problem is that when users think about sharing, they think about copying a database folder to another PC, and then the mechanism doesn't work. When one user makes a copy first, and then starts Gramps, there is no lock on the copy, so the other user's not aware of anything. And because of this, there is no safe way to cooperate this way, not even when both users share a single Dropbox folder. And that's because Dropbox creates copies too. Gramps connect and Ancestry solve this by using a single database, no copies, on the web, and in theory, you might be able to put the Gramps database in a shared folder in a home network. I doubt however whether that is what the original question was about. regards, Enno |