Link persons from main gedcom and sec. gedcom

A. S.
  • A. S.

    A. S. - 2011-03-25

    I have an genealogy from my family, now I want to start a genealogy of my grandmother. Because my grandmother and grandfather exist in both gedcoms I want to connect the gedcoms so when changing the person in the main gedcom the same persons changed data will appear in the other gedcom too.
    Hope my question is clear

  • ggpauly

    ggpauly - 2011-03-25

    Most genealogies would include a relative as close as a grandmother in one database.  (PGV really works on the database now, the Gedcom is a data transfer format.) 

    Perhaps you want to have a different portal for your grandmother's family, with a different root person?

  • Stephen Arnold

    Stephen Arnold - 2011-03-25

    While it is possible to 'link' the two family trees via your Grandmother, it is not possible to change the data in one place and have it change in other places. They remain separate. And, the linking procedure is flawed and heavily computational so it stresses your resources. Prior to improvements, the main reason for keeping separate family trees was size, but that is no longer much of a factor. I would add the data to your existing tree, but of course the choice is yours.

  • A. S.

    A. S. - 2011-03-25

    Thanks for the info.

    Probably will start new gedcom with the tree of my grandmother in one PHPGedview.

  • Gerry Kroll

    Gerry Kroll - 2011-03-26

    I agree.  It's much easier and a lot less work if all persons are in one database.

  • ggpauly

    ggpauly - 2011-03-26

    Forgive me for hijacking fireman2's thread, but it brings up a point I'm interested in.

    Is there a way to share a Gedcom (in the database sense) between two websites?

    For example, I'd like to have two different websites, one for my father's and one for my mother's families, with different welcome pages, news items, html blocks, favorites, etc.   These websites should share the database information for individuals, families, sources, and media. 

    In other words, the same basic information, presented differently.

    I've tried setting up two websites  with the same name Gedcom and same database - no good - changes in one are reflected in the other.

    If you rename the Gedcom and reimport it the data is duplicated.

    I think this used to be possible in earlier versions of PGV, before everything was moved to the database.  Was any provision made for this use case?  To me it seems highly desirable.



  • Gerry Kroll

    Gerry Kroll - 2011-03-26

    In future, please start your own thread.

    If you're sharing a set of database tables, wouldn't you want the changes made in one instance of PhGedView to be applied to the database as soon as they are approved?  The changed information cannot be hidden from the other instance.  (How could they?)

    Exactly WHAT tables would you not want shared?  This could be implemented, but I doubt that many people would want to do that.

  • ggpauly

    ggpauly - 2011-03-26

    If you're sharing a set of database tables, wouldn't you want the changes made in one instance of PhGedView to be applied to the database as soon as they are approved?

    Yes, for the information that would be exported to a Gedcom file.  Media file links should work in both domains. Other information (such as favorites, Welcome/MyGedView blocks, many configuration options, etc)  should be separate.   Some information, such as users, could be either shared or separate.

    The shared tables are (I think):

    pgv_link  (? not sure what this does)
    pgv_placelocation   (? not sure what this does)
    pgv_remotelinks  (? may not need to be supported)
    pgv_site_setting   (? not sure what this does)

    I'm not sure about pgv_modules, I don't make much use of external modules

    Regarding the desirability of this feature,  I encounter feedback from one side of the family not being very interested in the other side, to the point of slight say, resentment, of attention placed on research not concerning their blood relatives.  By having multiple websites, each devoted to a self-identified extended family, more interest in the overall collection of genealogical data may be generated.

    Similar concerns may be behind fireman2's OP and similar questions that occur from time to time.  This approach is simpler and provides more separation of concerns in that the presentation is separated from the data.

    Also, this would partially replace the remote linking feature that is reportedly not well supported.  



  • Gerry Kroll

    Gerry Kroll - 2011-03-26

    You'd have to add a site configuration option to define the table name prefix for shared tables, and then also a configuration option to indicate which tables can be shared and which can't.  This latter could be hard-coded, because not everyone will understand the implications.

    It's not too difficult to go through the code to identify the places the changed logic should apply.  It might be easier to define a different variable (or constant) for each table name so that the checks only have to be done once.

    Of course, this feature doesn't exist right now, but it wouldn't be too hard to implement.

  • Gerry Kroll

    Gerry Kroll - 2011-03-26

    Your thread should have been posted in the "discussion" forum, since we're talking about something that doesn't exist yet.

  • ggpauly

    ggpauly - 2011-03-27

    Thanks, if I have anything else to add I'll start a thread there.


Log in to post a comment.

Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.

Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:

JavaScript is required for this form.

No, thanks