I don't know if anyone else has seen this one ... I thought I'd seen something peculiar happening in some merges, but was only able to pin it down this evening.
It's definitely a bug. As usual, a little involved to explain, but should be easy enough to duplicate once it's understood ... Let's say you have a Legacy database containing a number of people with the same surname but no given names (it happens). Now you import a GEDCOM which also has some of the same people in it. Example: in the original database: RIN 1001 Jones, Albert RIN 1002 Smith, Betty - spouse RIN 1003 Jones, Carl - child RIN 1004 Jones - child RIN 1005 Jones - child RIN 1006 Jones - child imported from the GEDCOM: RIN 2001 Jones, Albert RIN 2002 Smith, Betty - spouse RIN 2003 Jones, Carl - child RIN 2004 Jones - child RIN 2005 Jones - child RIN 2006 Jones - child Now you proceed to merge - what you will end up with (at least what I am ending up with) is something like this: RIN 1001 Jones, Albert RIN 1002 Smith, Betty - spouse RIN 1003 Jones, Carl - child RIN 1004 Jones - child RIN 2004 Jones - child RIN 1005 Jones - child RIN 2005 Jones - child RIN 1006 Jones - child RIN 2006 Jones - child Now, say it's obvious which unnamed child is paired with which other unnamed child (by spouse's name, for example), so you have no trouble figuring out which of the original 3 goes with which of the imported 3 children. So, you go to merge same. Select, say, 1004; go to Manual Merge, click the Family tab. Select (say) 2004, the match for 1004 - double click to select it. When you get back to the double-paned merge screen, however, the right side contains someone different (let's say 2006 as an example), NOT the person you selected at all. The surname is the same, but that's all - in fact it usually turns out to be someone from a DIFFERENT FAMILY altogether ... so the procedure is clearly NOT taking the RIN into account at this point! This is a big pain in the neck, because I have to re-select the correct RIN from the Name List manually each time (it works then). Worse than the inconvenience is the implication that something fundamental is broken here, and it makes me very uneasy. I've been dealing with databases with given-name-less individuals for some time, but only observed this behavior recently. I just updated to the August 28, 2001 build, and I cannot be certain whether it was doing this before that time or not. I suspect, though I have not yet checked, that individuals with the pseudo-given-name of "Living" probably behave the same way. This needs fixed ASAP, IMHO! Thanks for plowing through this message, Bill Phillips To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
