I agree with Benny when he says "I would not silently
GRAMPS does not import. There is no Way I see the user
would know he
does not want that imported." 
The roadmap for 3.2 and 3.4  proposes a GEDCOM import
warnings report. I have raised bug 0005599  for this.
In revision 18815 [4a][4b] I have implemented a report
for GEDCOM import, showing lines that were not imported.
I have made a
number of subsequent fixes where there are more places
where lines are
ignored silently. At the same time as I implemented the
report, it was
easy to include code that would store data that is not
related to people, families, notes etc. is stored as
notes attached to
those objects, and submitter data is stored as
to the 'default source' (simply because repository
objects have the
data items necessary). I also extended the data items in
source' to store more of the header and submission
I know that some people (e.g. Tamara Jones )
notes, but this seems the most sensible way to preserve
especially in view of the fact that Gramps does not have
the same data
model as GEDCOM, so there are bound to be some things
cannot sensibly import.
There are several ways to control the storage of
(1) Store data in the 'default source' if the 'default
(2) Store data in the 'default source' anyway.
(3) Store the data anyway.
(4) Store the data if an option is selected.
(a) Attach the default source to objects anyway
(b) Attach the default source to objects if an option is
(c) attach the data to objects
(d) Attach the data to objects if an option is selected.
I have chosen (1b) for submitter and submission and (3c)
for notes for
ignored data. (1b) is consistent with the current
handling for default
source and (3c) prevent data loss without requiring an
for the user to take care of.
I would prefer to choose (2b) for submitter and
submission. In other
words, store the information about the import anyway (to
hold a true
record of what happened) but only attach it to what may
be masses of
objects if the user wants that.
I would prefer to retain option (3c) for notes, despite
comments because I think users will want to keep the
if we want to satisfy Tamura, we could go to (4d) - a
single option to
store ignored data in notes and attach them to the
relevant objects -
but this would be at the expense of complicating the
for preferences by an extra option.
So, what do you think (obviously not for changing in
the creating of the 'default source' with its associated
be made unconditional with just its attachment to
objects the subject
of an option. And should an option be introduced to
creation and attachment of notes about non-imported
 in http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=1360#c3705
(0001360: Gedcom input: SUBN and SUBM record handling)
problem...shares a few design
errors with several other applications; when it does not
non-standard GEDCOM tag...it modifies your database by
for tags it does not recognise"
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus
HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you
Gramps-devel mailing list