Will update or re-install scalp the CustomFilters of advanced users?

While discussing error handling in the experimental FilterParams custom filter editing tool, @kku noted that Gramps discards custom filters that reference non-existent (un-installed add-ons) rules as the custom_filters.xml is loaded. (It’ll take some experimenting to see if this discard is a purge or a quarantine. Perhaps the XML is commented for the affected filters.)

This observation set off alarms.

Add-on rules are a recent feature. There is no option to archive or reload one’s library of Custom Filters. (The text import Gramplet will perform a lot of XML-based object creation, but you cannot paste a custom_filter XML block to create a filter.) If the purge is silent, a LOT of work could be lost with no opportunity for recovery.

Could re-installing a fresh copy of 5.1.x (or migrating to 5.2) destroy many hours of crafting a library of custom filters?

A fresh copy of Gramps will not have the add-on rules packs or SuperTool generic rules installed yet. Meanwhile, Gramps has to run (and load the custom_filters.xml to initialize the active view) so that the Plugin Manager can be used to install the add-ons. Won’t that workflow purge a lot of Custom Filters?

Migrating to 5.2 might not present as much risk. That process will create a gramps52 folder in the Gramps User Directory and the custom filter file would have to be migrated manually.

Come to think of it, un-installing & re-installing a custom filter pack (when suspected of corruption or failed updating) might put custom filters at risk.

Note:
my workaround for backing up a custom-filter.xml is to add that file as a media object attached to a dummy person with a _Gramps surname. This adds that file to my backup with media objects. (I shudder to think… will restoring that .gpkg overwrite that file?) But I also periodically open that media object & transcribe it to a Note.

Custom filters are stored in the user’s version directory. When 5.2 is first installed it will contain no custom filters. An advanced user moving their custom_filters.xml file will have ample opportunity install 3rd party filters before copying the file into the gramps52 folder.

Yes, as I was writing, that thought occurred to me. (And it is the point of the next to last paragraph.)

I should probably re-title this topic. The risks are higher with a re-install of Gramps 5.1.x or a rule pack.

The 5.2 difficulty will be related to manual migration of customization. That can probably be addressed in documentation as a workflow.

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.