We are "keeping count" somewhat, but as Leonard wrote quoting Ken, it's a major ripping apart of the basic design of Legacy and would be very time consuming for the programmers. Not only would they have to restructure Legacy, they would also have to re-code all the other options based on the restructuring - not to mention the trickle-down for all the add-on programs.
Sincerely, Sherry Technical Support Legacy Family Tree On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 10:16 AM, singhals <singh...@erols.com> wrote: > Most two-sex marriages these days aren't "life-long" either, > though. > > My not needing the ability to add same-sex relationships > doesn't mean someone else won't need it, and I can always > not-use it if it's there. > > If someone's keeping count, here's a "it might be a nice > option" vote. > > Cheryl Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
