Request for discussion: Issue 10679, 10680

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

Request for discussion: Issue 10679, 10680

Stephen Adams
Hello everyone,

I am trying to follow the established rules for getting a new feature off the ground, if I'm not doing it quite right please feel free to correct me.

A few minutes ago I submitted 2 new feature requests idea to Mantis after checking to see if there were any other similar ideas.  I may have missed something but I gave it a go.  These two ideas are centered on the idea of capturing information from the growing amount of genetic information that is available through commercial DNA testing.

In what I believe is an understanding of Gramps development ideals I have tried to keep the ideas focused on capturing the core data while suggesting that analysis can occur through 3rd party add-ons.

I appreciate any discussion around this topic, thank you.

Steve Adams

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Request for discussion: Issue 10679, 10680

Nick Hall
On 12/07/18 18:36, Stephen Adams wrote:
> I am trying to follow the established rules for getting a new feature
> off the ground, if I'm not doing it quite right please feel free to
> correct me.

This is the right place for a technical discussion.

>
> A few minutes ago I submitted 2 new feature requests idea to Mantis
> after checking to see if there were any other similar ideas.  I may
> have missed something but I gave it a go.  These two ideas are
> centered on the idea of capturing information from the growing amount
> of genetic information that is available through commercial DNA testing.

Yes.  Your suggestions are good.

Did you read feature request #8919?
https://gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=8919

>
> In what I believe is an understanding of Gramps development ideals I
> have tried to keep the ideas focused on capturing the core data while
> suggesting that analysis can occur through 3rd party add-ons.

Correct.

>
> I appreciate any discussion around this topic, thank you.
>
We may also want to discuss this in gramps-users again.

Thanks for you feature requests.


Nick.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Request for discussion: Issue 10679, 10680

Stephen Adams
Hi Nick and everyone,

Did you read feature request #8919?
https://gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=8919

Despite looking I did miss this one.  The keywords I searched for seem not to have shown up in the csv I downloaded.  I'll have to learn to use Mantis better. I have now casually read it and will go over it in more detail later.  It appears a good deal of discussion and some work has already been done on this.

I would suggest that we not automatically update anyone based on anything, ever, or rather specifically that we not automatically update ancestral haplotypes for any ancestors and descendants.  One reason for this is misattributed parentage is often revealed by exactly this type of evidence.  If someone wishes to force this sort of behavior a tool can easily be built to do it.  I would very strongly prefer to enter data I am certain about.  If I want to speculate that my DNA results and my cousin's DNA results should have outcome "X" or outcome "Y" then that's analysis and I'd rather control that with a tool and then migrate only the results I really wish to.

 
We may also want to discuss this in gramps-users again.

Thanks for you feature requests.

I will watch for any conversation there.

Steve
 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Request for discussion: Issue 10679, 10680

Nick Hall
On 12/07/18 22:32, Stephen Adams wrote:

> I would suggest that we not automatically update anyone based on
> anything, ever, or rather specifically that we not automatically
> update ancestral haplotypes for any ancestors and descendants.  One
> reason for this is misattributed parentage is often revealed by
> exactly this type of evidence.  If someone wishes to force this sort
> of behavior a tool can easily be built to do it.  I would very
> strongly prefer to enter data I am certain about.  If I want to
> speculate that my DNA results and my cousin's DNA results should have
> outcome "X" or outcome "Y" then that's analysis and I'd rather control
> that with a tool and then migrate only the results I really wish to.
>
I agree.

Nick.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel