How do we harmonize custom data with a new standard feature?

Help
1

Gramps 5.2 added “Godparent” as a new standard Role.

However, users have been recording these relationship in their tree in a variety of ways. So, how do we upgrade the custom methods to the new standard one?

Let’s count the ways that a Godparent might have been recorded:

  • any of three custom types for Roles for a shared event (Christening, Adult Christening or Baptism) : Godparent, Godfather, Godmother
  • Associations of Godparent, Godfather, Godmother
  • inverse Associations of Godchild, Godson, Goddaughter

The obvious 1st step is to simplify by merging custom Types with the Tools → Utilities → Type cleanup… addon tool.

But what next?

How do we change (en masse) custom type Godparent roles to the newly built-in Godparent role?

1 Like
2

I used custom Godfather, Godmather, Godson, Goddauther roles and associations earlier. But later I’ve grouped them into Godparent and Godchild in event roles and associations.

3

Associations have existed at least by Gramps 2.2 in 2006. Yet there still aren’t even tools to find specific Associations.
image

The features that pertain to associations are:

  • Rule: Match associations of <person filter> (You have to create an “Everyone” person filter first.)
  • Rule: People with <count> associations
  • Utilities Tool: Type Cleanup doesn’t find Association Types. If it did, that tool creates a list of Objects (linked to the Object Editor) referencing any particular type.
  • Utilities Tool: Sync Associations… only adds missing Associations
  • Utilities Tool: Check Associations data… lists the Associations of Persons and shows their target person. But it doesn’t allow opening either person.

If there was any way to open both people involved in an Association, then you could see if there was a Christening event that could be shared (or you have to create one). Then you can choose where to move the Source Citations, Notes and Privacy from the Person Reference Editor for the Association: to the Reference information or the Shared information section of the Shared Event. And then delete the Association.

6

This question seems to be of critical importance.

As the Gramps data model evolves, we need a well documented method of recasting legacy workarounds (typically in custom attributes, associations, Event descriptions or Notes) into the newly supported data structures.

The addition of a standardized Godparent role for Events means that workarounds in custom Roles, Associations, and Inverse Associations need to be resolved. Which includes not only conveying the data to the right place but also cleaning out the remnant data.

Likewise, if unsupported import data will fit in a standard Gramps data structure, we need a cross-walking process.

For example, officially unrecognized custom GEDCOM _tags (or ADDR street data that is currently mishandled) creates an import failure Note. If a user has a preferred workaround (like a custom type Attribute for storing a _UUIDs of a specific service) then there should be a documented process for processing the Note content and disposing of the Note. (Or documentation for how to customize the Import & Export plugins to support a “round-trip” for the officially unsupported _tag.)

(Personally, I would prefer to see GEDCOM snippets saved in Custom Type attribute. Having a structured data representation of a custom _tag seems more easily parsed than a less structured Note.)

7

Another place where I now have to harmonize my Tree data for a new standard event in Gramps 5.2 is “Stillborn”

https://gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=11554