Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
18 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

Marie Alhomme

Hi everyone,


I'm VERY new to the genealogy world, and I have a (hopefully) quick question about gramps/trees...

Basically, I have an uncle who's really into genealogy (but he (self-admitedly) sucks at computers), and for our wedding ceremony, he exported me a .ged file with a tree for my family and a tree for my husband's, both in the same .ged file.
Since we plan on printing the thing on a 3x2m tarp on a frame for the event and his own software (geneatique?) apparently can't export anything vector based, or anything above A1 size, he sent it to me so that we could output a vector file with our own styles, etc., with Gramps.

BUT I can't for the file of me figure out how to output ONE tree for the both of us (since we're married) without creating a fictional child...?
My uncle had the same problem in his software, but a friend told me Gramps could solve that for us... but no dice yet.

Apart from exporting both trees separately and then joining them (ie. in Illustrator), is there something I'm missing?


Thanks a lot for your attention and help!


Cheers,
Marie and Loic

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

Ron Johnson
What do you mean by "fictional child"?

Note that I keep the two sides of my living tree in two separate Gramps tress.   My, my wife, my children's names, and those of my parents are in both, but in one they are just stubs;  the other has all the Residence data, etc.

So, when it's time to merge them for some huge project,  I
1) make backups of my two databases,
2) create a new tree (let's call it The One Huge Tree), and
3) import both backup databases into The One Huge Tree.

Because some people are in both trees, there will naturally be some duplication in The One Huge Tree.  So, I go in and merge the relevant families and people (there are functions in Gramps to merge families, people, events, places, etc).  Thus, after about 20 minutes of work, The One Huge Tree has no more duplicates, and it's nice and pretty.



On 08/26/2014 10:25 AM, Marie Alhomme wrote:

Hi everyone,


I'm VERY new to the genealogy world, and I have a (hopefully) quick question about gramps/trees...

Basically, I have an uncle who's really into genealogy (but he (self-admitedly) sucks at computers), and for our wedding ceremony, he exported me a .ged file with a tree for my family and a tree for my husband's, both in the same .ged file.
Since we plan on printing the thing on a 3x2m tarp on a frame for the event and his own software (geneatique?) apparently can't export anything vector based, or anything above A1 size, he sent it to me so that we could output a vector file with our own styles, etc., with Gramps.

BUT I can't for the file of me figure out how to output ONE tree for the both of us (since we're married) without creating a fictional child...?
My uncle had the same problem in his software, but a friend told me Gramps could solve that for us... but no dice yet.

Apart from exporting both trees separately and then joining them (ie. in Illustrator), is there something I'm missing?


Thanks a lot for your attention and help!


-- 
My word, man!  Don't you know your quantum statistics?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

Gerhard Killesreiter
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Am 26.08.2014 21:15, schrieb Ron Johnson:
> What do you mean by "fictional child"?
>


There's no need, all you need to do is to create a new family and
select the groom as husband and yourself as wife.

Cheers,
Gerhard

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iEYEARECAAYFAlP8558ACgkQfg6TFvELooT0lACcCw1QC7tmcx+32m5LMsXQW40F
VjcAnA846zS5gSaovgfrcseUO/TSMb2h
=SFmI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

paul womack
In reply to this post by Marie Alhomme
Marie Alhomme wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
>
> I'm VERY new to the genealogy world, and I have a (hopefully) quick question about gramps/trees...
>
> Basically, I have an uncle who's really into genealogy (but he (self-admitedly) sucks at computers), and for our wedding ceremony, he exported me a .ged file with a tree for my family and a tree for my husband's, both in the same .ged file.
> Since we plan on printing the thing on a 3x2m tarp on a frame for the event and his own software (geneatique?) apparently can't export anything vector based, or anything above A1 size, he sent it to me so that we could output a vector file with our own styles, etc., with Gramps.
>
> BUT I can't for the file of me figure out how to output ONE tree for the both of us (since we're married) without creating a fictional child...?
> My uncle had the same problem in his software, but a friend told me Gramps could solve that for us... but no dice yet.

Gramps can do this easily. Indeed, I would expect most any family tree software to be able to do. it.

All you're describing is a childless couple, which is a common and normal thing.

    BugBear

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

enno
Paul,

> Marie Alhomme wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>>
>> I'm VERY new to the genealogy world, and I have a (hopefully) quick question about gramps/trees...
>>
>> Basically, I have an uncle who's really into genealogy (but he (self-admitedly) sucks at computers), and for our wedding ceremony, he exported me a .ged file with a tree for my family and a tree for my husband's, both in the same .ged file.
>> Since we plan on printing the thing on a 3x2m tarp on a frame for the event and his own software (geneatique?) apparently can't export anything vector based, or anything above A1 size, he sent it to me so that we could output a vector file with our own styles, etc., with Gramps.
>>
>> BUT I can't for the file of me figure out how to output ONE tree for the both of us (since we're married) without creating a fictional child...?
>> My uncle had the same problem in his software, but a friend told me Gramps could solve that for us... but no dice yet.
> Gramps can do this easily. Indeed, I would expect most any family tree software to be able to do. it.
Well, as far as I can check, even Gramps can't do this, at least not
with the standard reports.
> All you're describing is a childless couple, which is a common and normal thing.
It is quite common, yes, for people to be wedded, but in this case that
is not the point. You see, Marie's question is not really about merging.
She wrote that her and her husband's tree are already in the same GEDCOM
file, and if there is family relation between them in that GEDCOM file,
that part of the merging had been done.

What Marie asks for is a family ancestor graph. That's not in the
standard reports, because in those, the ancestor graph starts at a
person, which would be either her or her husband, and that's not what
she wants. She wants ONE tree for both, without creating a fictional child.

The good news is that such a report does exist in the add-ons. Bad news
is that it crashes in my 3.4.8. I will try that in my 4.1.1 in a minute.

regards,

Enno


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

enno
In reply to this post by Marie Alhomme
Hi Marie,
I'm VERY new to the genealogy world, and I have a (hopefully) quick question about gramps/trees...

Basically, I have an uncle who's really into genealogy (but he (self-admitedly) sucks at computers), and for our wedding ceremony, he exported me a .ged file with a tree for my family and a tree for my husband's, both in the same .ged file.
Since we plan on printing the thing on a 3x2m tarp on a frame for the event and his own software (geneatique?) apparently can't export anything vector based, or anything above A1 size, he sent it to me so that we could output a vector file with our own styles, etc., with Gramps.

BUT I can't for the file of me figure out how to output ONE tree for the both of us (since we're married) without creating a fictional child...?
My uncle had the same problem in his software, but a friend told me Gramps could solve that for us... but no dice yet.

Apart from exporting both trees separately and then joining them (ie. in Illustrator), is there something I'm missing?
Well, there is one report that might do the job:

https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Family_Tree

It is the only one that I can find that has a center family instead of a person, and can print ancestors of both. It's not a standard report, so you have to download it via preferences first.

The bad news is that on my PC it doesn't work.

Good news, maybe:

http://genealogy.about.com/od/decorative_charts/tp/Custom-Family-Tree-Charts-And-Templates.htm

and

http://blog.myheritage.com/2010/11/create-a-beautiful-family-tree-chart-online-print-it-as-a-poster/

I mention the 2nd, because on the 1st picture there, you see a couple and their ancestors, which seems to be exactly what you want. My Heritage is free for trees up to 250 persons, and experience shows that they don't complain about much larger trees either. They also have a free program that may do the same, and like Gramps, it is multi-lingual, so I assume that it can create charts in French too.

regards,

Enno


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

jerome
In reply to this post by Marie Alhomme
Marie,

For the "vector tree", maybe you should install GraphViz, then Gramps will provide additional reports (menu Rapports -> Diagrammes).




Once your data imported (via a Gedcom import), you should be able to easily handle your different "branches" via filter rules!


eg, "Graphique relationnel" with your side (ancestor of... + brothers/sisters of ... + children of ... ?) and with your husband side (ancestor of ... + etc ...)


Otherwise, according to your occupation, maybe you may be also interested on experimental tool/way like: http://gramps-connect.org/ https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=GEPS_013:_Gramps_Webapp ?


regards,
Jérôme


Le mar. 26 août 2014 at 17:25, Marie Alhomme <[hidden email]> a écrit :

Hi everyone,


I'm VERY new to the genealogy world, and I have a (hopefully) quick question about gramps/trees...

Basically, I have an uncle who's really into genealogy (but he (self-admitedly) sucks at computers), and for our wedding ceremony, he exported me a .ged file with a tree for my family and a tree for my husband's, both in the same .ged file.
Since we plan on printing the thing on a 3x2m tarp on a frame for the event and his own software (geneatique?) apparently can't export anything vector based, or anything above A1 size, he sent it to me so that we could output a vector file with our own styles, etc., with Gramps.

BUT I can't for the file of me figure out how to output ONE tree for the both of us (since we're married) without creating a fictional child...?
My uncle had the same problem in his software, but a friend told me Gramps could solve that for us... but no dice yet.

Apart from exporting both trees separately and then joining them (ie. in Illustrator), is there something I'm missing?


Thanks a lot for your attention and help!


Cheers,
Marie and Loic

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

jerome
In reply to this post by Marie Alhomme
>  Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

Gramps does not need to create a bady for generating a "couple".
By 'Family', we should translate it as at least 'two persons'!

So, link your husband and you into a new family record, then make two groups of filter rules (ancestors of ..., sibblings of ...) matching for both sides. Create an other filter rule which will be used into reports : a filter rule including the two groups of filter rules. You could also look at 'Spouse of ...' rule matching people already listed via these rules (matching filter rule already set). 

By generating custom filter rules, you do not need to create a "fake baby".
This feature is very flexible and it is an alternative to common base filter rules set into reports or export.


regards,
Jérôme



Le mar. 26 août 2014 at 17:25, Marie Alhomme <[hidden email]> a écrit :

Hi everyone,


I'm VERY new to the genealogy world, and I have a (hopefully) quick question about gramps/trees...

Basically, I have an uncle who's really into genealogy (but he (self-admitedly) sucks at computers), and for our wedding ceremony, he exported me a .ged file with a tree for my family and a tree for my husband's, both in the same .ged file.
Since we plan on printing the thing on a 3x2m tarp on a frame for the event and his own software (geneatique?) apparently can't export anything vector based, or anything above A1 size, he sent it to me so that we could output a vector file with our own styles, etc., with Gramps.

BUT I can't for the file of me figure out how to output ONE tree for the both of us (since we're married) without creating a fictional child...?
My uncle had the same problem in his software, but a friend told me Gramps could solve that for us... but no dice yet.

Apart from exporting both trees separately and then joining them (ie. in Illustrator), is there something I'm missing?


Thanks a lot for your attention and help!


Cheers,
Marie and Loic

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

enno
Jerome,
> >  Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?
>
> Gramps does not need to create a bady for generating a "couple".
> By 'Family', we should translate it as at least 'two persons'!
True, but there is no ancestor graph that starts with a couple. They all
start with a person, and I checked some other programs too, like
Ancestral Quest and RootsMagic.

Charts on My Heritage are free, even when your tree is way larger than
the free 250 limit. I just created one, and got a link to it by mail in
a few minutes. For privacy I can't publish the PDF, but this is how it
looks, and how to create it on the French My Heritage:

http://geneaborg.wordpress.com/2014/08/27/family-chart-menu-on-my-heritage-in-french/

regards,

Enno


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

Maurice Snell
In reply to this post by Marie Alhomme
Hi All,

Isn't it much simpler than all the previous comments requiring custom filters etc: just get Gramps to print a report from everyone in the database?  Assuming you have imported the two family trees in to a new database, (and added the new marriage, no need for any children), then you're not going to have any other individuals apart from those you want.  So you can plot something like the Family Relationship Graph, (that I have successfully printed at 16xA3 = 2xA0), for all people in the database.

Maurice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

chrisbagley
In reply to this post by Marie Alhomme
Although this approach does require a person entry for a child, I have produced a graph report showing all the ancestors for my wife's and my trees, but not including either of our children, by:
  • Setting up a filter
  • giving it the first rule "Ancestors of <myself>
  • giving it the second rule "Ancestors of <my wife>
  • giving it a third rule "Ancestors of <my daughter>
  • setting the Options to "At least one rule must apply

and using that filter in Reports-Graphs-Relationship Graph: that seems to work.  At the RHS (because I am running it as a horizontal graph, left to right) it terminates with my name and my wife's name and an ellipse for our wedding event, but nothing beyond that, i.e. no children.  So for a forthcoming marriage with no children one would need to set up the forthcoming wedding as an event  but without the date, and a dummy child but this dummy child would not show in the output.


If your trees are anything like mine then you would need to run it through Peter Hewitt/Maurice Snell GrampsCrossing0.4.py to get rid of most of the crossing edges.


I should add that when I set the filter with just the first two rules, i.e. Ancestor of myself and Ancestor of my wife then I got a graph with both family trees but not aligned, and not showing myself or my wife, though I guess by adding a couple more rules then I could have included ourselves.  But the graph would not be neatly aligned with the two of us together because Gramps would not know that the two of were together.


Hope I'm on the right track and this is of interest.


regards
Chris


On 26/08/14 23:25, Marie Alhomme wrote:

Hi everyone,


I'm VERY new to the genealogy world, and I have a (hopefully) quick question about gramps/trees...

Basically, I have an uncle who's really into genealogy (but he (self-admitedly) sucks at computers), and for our wedding ceremony, he exported me a .ged file with a tree for my family and a tree for my husband's, both in the same .ged file.
Since we plan on printing the thing on a 3x2m tarp on a frame for the event and his own software (geneatique?) apparently can't export anything vector based, or anything above A1 size, he sent it to me so that we could output a vector file with our own styles, etc., with Gramps.

BUT I can't for the file of me figure out how to output ONE tree for the both of us (since we're married) without creating a fictional child...?
My uncle had the same problem in his software, but a friend told me Gramps could solve that for us... but no dice yet.

Apart from exporting both trees separately and then joining them (ie. in Illustrator), is there something I'm missing?


Thanks a lot for your attention and help!


Cheers,
Marie and Loic


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/


_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

Marie Alhomme
In reply to this post by Marie Alhomme
Hi everyone,

First of all, thank you very much for all your answers!
Second, sorry for not answering earlier, I'm swamped at the moment (work + planning the wedding, it's in 3 weeks!!) and only got to trying your suggestions this morning.
I hope you won't mind trying to answer all of your suggestions at once for the sake of mailing-list sanity :)

So, to recap :
- I tried downloading/installing/running Family Tree, it looked promising, BUT: I have a Mac so tried it in my Parallels VM but it tries to create a directory in a folder where it apparently doesn't have the rights to and just shuts down with an error msg... It's been too long since I actually used a Windows to try and debug that, so I tried online, but I haven't found how to change the online version's appearance to have a tree centered on us AND where both branches are unfolded? (might try again tomorrow)
- I tried installing the "Family Tree" add-on for Gramps, as it looked like exactly what I need but alas it fails with my version (4.1.0-1), something about "Style Object" not being iterable (SVG export, PDF msg is different but still about "Style")? Should I copy the full error msg?
- I've just finished installing VizGraph but I don't see any new diagrams options?
- I haven't tried any of the "filter this or that" options because I've pretty much no idea what you're talking about and virtually no time to read through the whole doc about filters. I'm already late for work as it is with spending 2hrs trying the above different options this morning, no breakfast, and I'm afraid I'm getting grumpy/frustrated :(

I clearly am lost, I don't get many of the concepts that you guys are referring to, and I'm rather surprised at how complicated all this is "just to print a tree"... :/
I'm sorry if I sound ungrateful, 'cause I'm really not, but I'm at my wits' end (yes, they're short at the moment).

I was wondering, if any of you have a working "Family Tree" add-on for gramps, would you be willing to receive my file and try exporting it, at least to make sure it doesn't come from my file?
Or to actually just export the whole thing in SVG with a few criterias that I'd provide (believe me, there're not that many)? I'm ready to spring for a few beers on paypal is how lost and frustrated and about-to-give-up I am...

I'm sorry for bothering you again, but sincerely appreciate all help you've already sent my way.


Thanks again,
Marie

--
Agence PouipouiDesign SARL - Création de Sites Internet
http://pouipouidesign.net - [hidden email]
09.72.46.44.62 - 06.61.35.62.22
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

paul womack
In reply to this post by chrisbagley
Chris Bagley wrote:> Although this approach does require a person entry for a child, I have produced a graph report showing all the ancestors for my wife's and my trees, but not including either of our children, by:
 >
 >   * Setting up a filter
 >   * giving it the first rule "Ancestors of <myself>
 >   * giving it the second rule "Ancestors of <my wife>
 >   * giving it a third rule "Ancestors of <my daughter>
 >   * setting the Options to "At least one rule must apply

The same result can be achieved by ticking "include original person"
in the first two "Ancestors of" rules, so the daughter (and daughter rule) are not needed for this purpose.

  BugBear

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

Marie Alhomme
In reply to this post by Marie Alhomme
Hi again,

Just got my head out of my butt and found the export options on the My Heritage website -_-" and am now waiting on my files...
Hopefully, this will be the answer to all, and I'll leave you alone :)

I'll keep you posted in any case, and thanks again for your answers about it all!


Cheers,
Marie

--
Agence PouipouiDesign SARL - Création de Sites Internet
http://pouipouidesign.net - [hidden email]
09.72.46.44.62 - 06.61.35.62.22

________________________________________
De : Marie Alhomme
Envoyé : jeudi 28 août 2014 09:59
À : [hidden email]
Objet : Re: [Gramps-users] Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

Hi everyone,

First of all, thank you very much for all your answers!
Second, sorry for not answering earlier, I'm swamped at the moment (work + planning the wedding, it's in 3 weeks!!) and only got to trying your suggestions this morning.
I hope you won't mind trying to answer all of your suggestions at once for the sake of mailing-list sanity :)

So, to recap :
- I tried downloading/installing/running Family Tree, it looked promising, BUT: I have a Mac so tried it in my Parallels VM but it tries to create a directory in a folder where it apparently doesn't have the rights to and just shuts down with an error msg... It's been too long since I actually used a Windows to try and debug that, so I tried online, but I haven't found how to change the online version's appearance to have a tree centered on us AND where both branches are unfolded? (might try again tomorrow)
- I tried installing the "Family Tree" add-on for Gramps, as it looked like exactly what I need but alas it fails with my version (4.1.0-1), something about "Style Object" not being iterable (SVG export, PDF msg is different but still about "Style")? Should I copy the full error msg?
- I've just finished installing VizGraph but I don't see any new diagrams options?
- I haven't tried any of the "filter this or that" options because I've pretty much no idea what you're talking about and virtually no time to read through the whole doc about filters. I'm already late for work as it is with spending 2hrs trying the above different options this morning, no breakfast, and I'm afraid I'm getting grumpy/frustrated :(

I clearly am lost, I don't get many of the concepts that you guys are referring to, and I'm rather surprised at how complicated all this is "just to print a tree"... :/
I'm sorry if I sound ungrateful, 'cause I'm really not, but I'm at my wits' end (yes, they're short at the moment).

I was wondering, if any of you have a working "Family Tree" add-on for gramps, would you be willing to receive my file and try exporting it, at least to make sure it doesn't come from my file?
Or to actually just export the whole thing in SVG with a few criterias that I'd provide (believe me, there're not that many)? I'm ready to spring for a few beers on paypal is how lost and frustrated and about-to-give-up I am...

I'm sorry for bothering you again, but sincerely appreciate all help you've already sent my way.


Thanks again,
Marie

--
Agence PouipouiDesign SARL - Création de Sites Internet
http://pouipouidesign.net - [hidden email]
09.72.46.44.62 - 06.61.35.62.22
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

chrisbagley
In reply to this post by paul womack
Indeed it does!  I should have read the small print.

Because the graph requires a center person I also used turned off the
"include relationship to centre person" to avoid having half the boxes
showing the person's relationship to the central person, and picked as a
central person one of the people in the database who is not an ancestor
to avoid having one of the boxes shown with the particular shape used
for the central person.

Chris

On 28/08/14 16:05, paul womack wrote:

> Chris Bagley wrote:> Although this approach does require a person
> entry for a child, I have produced a graph report showing all the
> ancestors for my wife's and my trees, but not including either of our
> children, by:
> >
> >   * Setting up a filter
> >   * giving it the first rule "Ancestors of <myself>
> >   * giving it the second rule "Ancestors of <my wife>
> >   * giving it a third rule "Ancestors of <my daughter>
> >   * setting the Options to "At least one rule must apply
>
> The same result can be achieved by ticking "include original person"
> in the first two "Ancestors of" rules, so the daughter (and daughter
> rule) are not needed for this purpose.
>
>  BugBear
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

Paul Franklin-5
In reply to this post by Marie Alhomme
We, I don't really know what you have in mind but if you and
your husband and all their ancestors are already in your GEDCOM,
and thus in gramps, why not use the Family Lines Graph report?
It is part of every gramps, assuming you have GraphViz (and I
believe the Mac bundle does).

It will allow adding whatever people you want to the "People of
Interest" list, so add you and your husband, uncheck the box
which says "Follow children to determine 'family lines'" and then
select whatever custom paper size you want.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

derHeinzi
In reply to this post by Maurice Snell
Hi Maurice and all,

> So you can plot something like the Family Relationship Graph, (that I have
> successfully printed at 16xA3 = 2xA0), for all people in the database.

thats right. And as a hint to Enno: If you have more people in the DB than you want in the graph, the Relationship Graph allows selecting a filter as starting point. So you could create person filters to select the people involved.

What I do once and then always reuse is a set of filters like the following:
1. create a filter = Bookmarked people (name it e.g. Bm)
2. create a filter = ancestors of <filter> and use Bm as the input filter. (Any rule must match.) Name it BmAn
3. create a filter = spouses of <filter> and use BmAn as the input filter. (Any match) Name it BmAnSp
... create additional filters, if you want more people to show up e.g. children of <filter> with BmAnSp to have aunts and uncles on all levels. (Name BmAnSpCh)

Then, when your filters are set up:
1. Bookmark the persons you want the report to start with. (eg. yourself and your spouse)
2. Create Relationship Graph with BmAnSp (or whatever your wanted detail filter is) as the input

This way you can create the wanted graph for any persons in your tree simply by bookmarking them.

Play around some with the filtering. It is quite useful. And if you start with the Bookmarked People filter, you don't have to recreate the filters for each new report. But take care to name the filters in a way you later know what it was you were selecting.

HTH and kind regards,
Heinz

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging two trees without creating a "fake baby"?

jerome
In reply to this post by Marie Alhomme
Hi Marie,

> - I've just finished installing GraphViz but I don't see any new diagrams options?

If your locale is french, have a look at Rapports menu.
You should see a child item named "Digrammes" (was just "Graphiques" in 3.3).

If your locale is english, have a look at Reports menu.
You should see a child item named "Graphs"

If there is no GraphViz support into MacOS bundle, maybe you can try to install 'graphviz-gui'? According to https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Mac_OS_X:Build_from_source:MacPorts#GraphViz

"You may wish to install GraphViz to handle some of the graphical reports that Gramps can produce. MacPorts can provide you with either graphical or command-line based versions of either a 'stable' or 'development' release of GraphViz. 'graphviz-gui' is recommended unless you know that you have a need for the development version. Install with:
    sudo port install graphviz-gui"


I hope this could help.

Jérôme

Le jeu. 28 août 2014 at 9:59, Marie Alhomme <[hidden email]> a écrit :
Hi everyone, First of all, thank you very much for all your answers! Second, sorry for not answering earlier, I'm swamped at the moment (work + planning the wedding, it's in 3 weeks!!) and only got to trying your suggestions this morning. I hope you won't mind trying to answer all of your suggestions at once for the sake of mailing-list sanity :) So, to recap : - I tried downloading/installing/running Family Tree, it looked promising, BUT: I have a Mac so tried it in my Parallels VM but it tries to create a directory in a folder where it apparently doesn't have the rights to and just shuts down with an error msg... It's been too long since I actually used a Windows to try and debug that, so I tried online, but I haven't found how to change the online version's appearance to have a tree centered on us AND where both branches are unfolded? (might try again tomorrow) - I tried installing the "Family Tree" add-on for Gramps, as it looked like exactly what I need but alas it fails with my version (4.1.0-1), something about "Style Object" not being iterable (SVG export, PDF msg is different but still about "Style")? Should I copy the full error msg? - I've just finished installing VizGraph but I don't see any new diagrams options? - I haven't tried any of the "filter this or that" options because I've pretty much no idea what you're talking about and virtually no time to read through the whole doc about filters. I'm already late for work as it is with spending 2hrs trying the above different options this morning, no breakfast, and I'm afraid I'm getting grumpy/frustrated :( I clearly am lost, I don't get many of the concepts that you guys are referring to, and I'm rather surprised at how complicated all this is "just to print a tree"... :/ I'm sorry if I sound ungrateful, 'cause I'm really not, but I'm at my wits' end (yes, they're short at the moment). I was wondering, if any of you have a working "Family Tree" add-on for gramps, would you be willing to receive my file and try exporting it, at least to make sure it doesn't come from my file? Or to actually just export the whole thing in SVG with a few criterias that I'd provide (believe me, there're not that many)? I'm ready to spring for a few beers on paypal is how lost and frustrated and about-to-give-up I am... I'm sorry for bothering you again, but sincerely appreciate all help you've already sent my way. Thanks again, Marie -- Agence PouipouiDesign SARL - Création de Sites Internet http://pouipouidesign.net - [hidden email] 09.72.46.44.62 - 06.61.35.62.22 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Slashdot TV. Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters. http://tv.slashdot.org/ _______________________________________________ Gramps-users mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  
Video for Nerds.  Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users