- Original Message -
From: Dennis M. Kowallek
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 9:54 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Files
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:45:03 +1000, "Colin Liddell"
wrote:
QuestionDo I a: Click on Merge right
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:45:03 +1000, "Colin Liddell"
wrote:
>QuestionDo I a: Click on Merge right into Left or do I
> b: Click Skip to next?
>If a: Does Legacy create a second marriage or does that happen if I click
>Skip to next?
>
>I have looked in the help fil
- Original Message -
From: Jenny M Benson
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Files
Colin Liddell wrote
I am in the process of merging two files and have a number of persons who
married twice.
In the
Colin Liddell wrote
I am in the process of merging two files and have a number of persons
who married twice.
In the Merging two Individuals Window I have as an example, John SMITH
in the left hand pane and John SMITH on the right hand pane.
John in the left is married to Mary Jones and they h
I am in the process of merging two files and have a number of persons who
married twice.
In the Merging two Individuals Window I have as an example, John SMITH in
the left hand pane and John SMITH on the right hand pane.
John in the left is married to Mary Jones and they have four children.
In
for you.
Valerie
_
From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com] On Behalf
Of Walter Johnston
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 5:39 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Only Designated Subsets
I don't know why I have a thing a
instead of
tagging the incoming DB) but just as useful answer.
Thanks very much.
From: Valerie Laskowski
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 2:12:17 PM
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Merging Only Designated Subsets
Use the "Find Dup
k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com] On Behalf
Of Walter Johnston
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 12:21 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Only Designated Subsets
Yes, but I do not see any way to use it on a specified subset that omits no
one in the subs
23, 2009 7:53:18 AM
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Merging Only Designated Subsets
Are you using the Intellisearch feature at
all?
Valerie
From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com
[mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com] On Behalf Of Walter
Johnston
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 4
Are you using the Intellisearch feature at all?
Valerie
_
From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com] On Behalf
Of Walter Johnston
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 4:02 AM
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Only Designated Subsets
of potential matches.
I guess Legacy just cannot do what I need it to do.
From: Carl Cox
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 7:03:15 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Only Designated Subsets
<>
Legacy is great on thi
ure, so next time it comes up
again. My titles are off, since my book is not with the laptop at the moment.
Hope you can translate what I said.
Rich in LA CA
--- On Sat, 8/22/09, Carl Cox wrote:
> From: Carl Cox
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Only Designated Subsets
> To: LegacyU
<>
Legacy is great on this type of merge. Just do a manual merge on a person of
your choice, one that is in the center of the people. If the new ones are all
connected, then Legacy will look around each merge and find spouses, children,
and parents that need to be merged. It will also suggest m
I have a large database to whcih, from time to time, I want to import and merge
smaller databases. When I do this, I would like the merge feature to consider
only potential merges with the newly added RINs. Certainly I can keep that
group separate on import, by importing them with RINs starting
Yes, Heather, that helped quite a lot. I was able to get the job
done. Now on to the rest of those partial family files :-). Thanks.
Mary Jo Harper
At 10:29 PM 8/15/2009, you wrote:
It helps if you think of the drag and drop more as an import than a
merge so it is asking if the per
<>
I like to merge the same person, because the first thing you need to do once
the drag and drop is done is integrate the two files. With the automatic merge
functions in Legacy, you can drag and drop two families, and after you point
Legacy to the first person Legacy finds the rest.
The RIN
I don't have a lot of time to do this response, and it has been a while
since I've done drag+drop from a split file - so this is from memory.
It helps if you think of the drag and drop more as an import than a
merge so it is asking if the person (people) that you are dragging
should keep the s
Hello,
I don't know much about Legacy, though I've used it on and off for many
years. And on and off for many years, I've developed file after
file of partial information, partial families, etc., as I've discovered
them. I've messed up so many family files, and have restarted so
many family fi
the process,
import using 'starting with' RINs 11; as 5432 should become 105432, so you
can check the accuracy.
If your files are larger, (or smaller) use the tool 1('#of0's)1.
Rich in LA CA
--- On Sun, 6/14/09, Edward wrote:
> From: Edward
> Subject: RE: [
le that merges the two.
John S. Adams
Hermosa Beach, CA
--
From: "Veronica Manalvo"
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 2:49 AM
To:
Subject: [LegacyUG] Merging Charts
Hi everyone,
I'm a relatively new user of Legacy Family Tree v7.0 and
Edward wrote:
I have asked the same question (how to combine two *.fdb family trees into
one) on 6-5-09 but had no answer. I have a friend in Poland who
combined-merged two family trees into one but I think he is using a Polish
version of family tree program. Have to ask him.
I don't think s
Tarchalski
-Original Message-
From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com] On Behalf
Of Dede Holden
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 6:53 AM
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Charts
Veronica,
I have been working on the same thing for my
lto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com] On Behalf
Of Dede Holden
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 8:53 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Charts
Veronica,
I have been working on the same thing for my husband, as we are having a
family get together which will include the descendants of
Veronica,
I have been working on the same thing for my husband, as we are having
a family get together which will include the descendants of both sets
of his grandparents. I ended up printing two separate descendant
charts, one for each set of grandparents. I couldn't come up with a
way to inclu
Hi everyone,
I'm a relatively new user of Legacy Family Tree v7.0 and I have a query in
regards to charting. What I am trying to do essentially is create a standard
descendant chart but with two groups of descendants merged on the one chart -
that is, I am trying to get the descendants of b
I was going to post a suggestion on the Legacy site but it's not
loading for me this morning.
Since merging sources seems to be so problematic, especially basic to
SourceWriter, I wish it were easier to view two sources side by side
so that I could do the merging by hand more easily.
On Tue, Mar
Thanks Ron. I was able to merge 2 SW sources with your method.
Richard
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:14 AM, ronald ferguson wrote:
>
> Richard,
>
> For me sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't! I can get it to work for
> Source Writer styles by first double clicking, as though I was going to
Richard Van Wasshnova wrote
When I click on ANY source that begins with asterisk then the "Combine"
button the radio buttons all remain active (unchanged).
When I click on ANY basic source then the "Combine" button the radio
buttons all (except cancel) go inactive.
I can confirm this. It do
ergys/
_
> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:32:39 -0700
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Sources in the New Improved Legacy"
> From: rfvanwasshn...@gmail.com
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
>
> When I click on
When I click on ANY source that begins with asterisk then the
"Combine" button the radio buttons all remain active (unchanged).
When I click on ANY basic source then the "Combine" button the radio
buttons all (except cancel) go inactive.
I guess I'm being punished.
--
Richard Van Wasshnova
http:
We are doing something different I guess. I just tried it and it is
working fine for me. It shouldn't make a difference, but are you
combining a *basic* source (source you made without using the
Sourcewriter) with a source you made using the Sourcewriter? Is that
what you are saying?
Robert
When I click on a basic source in the souce list then click on the
button "Combine Highlited Source with another in list" all the radio
buttons on top right fade to inactive except the "Cancel" button. When
I click on a Sourcewriter source then click on the button "Combine
Highlited Source with ano
I need help! I have just done a simple manual merge of two individuals. I
did a backup, not to my flash drive, but just the temporary backup. I
remember some recent conversation about this type vs. the zipped backups.
Once I completed the merge, I printed an individual report to be sure all
the
quot;
To:
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Basic Sources into Sourcewriter
Brian,
I for two, would also like to have the opportunity to merge the old
and the new and face any dire consequences with a warning I am
sure there are others that also would l
Brian,
I for two, would also like to have the opportunity to merge the old
and the new and face any dire consequences with a warning I am
sure there are others that also would like that choice...
Thanks...
...Lew
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Arnold Sprague wrote:
> Brian,
>If I
Brian,
If I read your reply correctly, the merge problem does not
happen all the time. Perhaps, it only happens in isolated instances.
If this is so, is it possible for us to BE ALLOWED to do
merges WITH LEGACY FIRST INFORMING us that bad, very bad, things may
happen *and* that
Thank you, Brian. That's all I was asking for. Sorry if I caused any
problem. Have a nice day...
Lew
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Brian/Support
wrote:
> Lew,
>
> When I tested this and reported the problem with merging basic sources into
> sourcewriter sources I found that the detail entri
Lew,
When I tested this and reported the problem with merging basic sources
into sourcewriter sources I found that the detail entries from the old
style source were lost.
The Basic source details were not copied to the sourcewriter template
fields. Initially when you look at the source in th
:
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/fergys/
_
> Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 22:40:17 -0800
> From: rfvanwasshn...@gmail.com
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Basi
Thank you, Richard. I have not seen any announcement from Legacy that
the "source conversion tool" is ready to be released but even if it
is, I would still like to know what is wrong with the "combine" method
and why it was taken away.
Lew
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Richard Van Wasshnova
e descendants of William and Sarah (Patterson) Thompson
>
> - Original Message - From: "Wynthner"
> To:
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Basic Sources into Sourcewriter
>
>
>> Perhaps, then again, perhaps not...
Hi Lew,
I'm with you. I also did several such merges under build 55 and
although everything seemed to be satisfactory and definitely the
quckest way to shrink my sources list I'd like to be sure.
I have been told it is because the "Source conversion tool" is ready
to be rolled out in the next buil
easier to
go with another product that to sit around here and complain.
Elizabeth
researching the descendants of William and Sarah (Patterson) Thompson
- Original Message -
From: "Wynthner"
To:
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Basic So
I believe some-one wrote a few days ago that the Source Conversion tool
is due in the next build, so perhaps removing what we had was a
preliminary step?
-
JL
JLog - simple computer technology for genealogists
http://www.jgen.ws/jlog
Wynthner wrote:
Perhaps, then again, perhaps not...
But
Perhaps, then again, perhaps not...
But until a full explaination of just why the feature was pulled and the
warning issued one is left to wonder.
--- On Tue, 1/6/09, Elizabeth Richardson wrote:
> From: Elizabeth Richardson
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Basic Sources into Source
) Thompson
- Original Message -
From: "Chick Lewis"
To:
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 5:34 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Basic Sources into Sourcewriter
I am not getting any error message, nor is there any evidence of
damage that I can see, but Legacy must have removed
; Cc: ; ;
>
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:47 PM
> Subject: [LegacyUG] Merging Basic Sources into Sourcewriter
>
>
>> Sorry to keep asking about this issue and I hate to be a pest, but I
>> really need to know what, if any damage has been done to my file
>> becaus
Sarah (Patterson) Thompson
- Original Message -
From: "Chick Lewis"
To:
Cc: ; ;
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:47 PM
Subject: [LegacyUG] Merging Basic Sources into Sourcewriter
Sorry to keep asking about this issue and I hate to be a pest, but I
really need to know wh
Sorry to keep asking about this issue and I hate to be a pest, but I
really need to know what, if any damage has been done to my file
because I merged basic sources into sourcewriter before that feature
was removed for some unknown reason in build 7.0.0.72. A response
from Legacy would be greatly
ere
> getting from the list.
>
> Kirsten
>
> -Original Message-
> From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on
> Behalf Of Chick Lewis
> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 4:52 PM
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Subject: Re: [L
Of Chick Lewis
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 4:52 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging basic sources into sourcewriter
Hi Kristen,
Thank you for your comment, but I am confused. I noticed at the bottom
of your message that an **Original
: "Chick Lewis"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging basic sources into sourcewriter
Hi Kristen,
Thank you for your comment, but I am confused. I noticed at the bottom
of your message that an **Original Message from
k...@legacyfamilytree.com o
k Lewis
> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:31 AM
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging basic sources into sourcewriter
>
>
> Maybe so, but it would be nice if Legacy would at least acknowledge
> why the merge feature has been remove
yfamilytree.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging basic sources into sourcewriter
Maybe so, but it would be nice if Legacy would at least acknowledge
why the merge feature has been removed and tell us the pitfalls of
having done it that way. Legacy has been extremely silent on this
question and has
Maybe so, but it would be nice if Legacy would at least acknowledge
why the merge feature has been removed and tell us the pitfalls of
having done it that way. Legacy has been extremely silent on this
question and has not answered a message I sent directly to support.
If, as you say, the sourcewr
Hi Lew,
I too was very upset with Legacy after upgrading from build 55. I had
done a half dozen merges of old syle to source writer which required
only slight touch ups. By the time I got back to trying to do more
(after build 55 was trashed) Legacy was protecting me from myself and
not allowing.
g directly with the company seems a much better way to do it.
>
> Elizabeth
> researching the descendants of William and Sarah (Patterson) Thompson
>
> - Original Message - From: "Chick Lewis"
> To:
> Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 1:00 PM
> Subject: [L
mething you'd like to suggest,
> communicating directly with the company seems a much better way to do it.
>
> Elizabeth
> researching the descendants of William and Sarah (Patterson) Thompson
>
> - Original Message - From: "Chick Lewis"
> To:
> Sen
Elizabeth
> researching the descendants of William and Sarah (Patterson) Thompson
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Chick Lewis"
> To:
> Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 1:00 PM
> Subject: [LegacyUG] Merging basic sources into sourcewriter
>
>
>
er way to do it.
Elizabeth
researching the descendants of William and Sarah (Patterson) Thompson
- Original Message -
From: "Chick Lewis"
To:
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 1:00 PM
Subject: [LegacyUG] Merging basic sources into sourcewriter
I would like to hear from Lega
I would like to hear from Legacy as to why this feature was removed
(build 76, I think) It seems to work very well and I have had no
problems converting sources from FTM16 into sourcewriter using this
method. Apparently there are others also that liked this feature. I
think Legacy should explain wh
her fixes that were
> included in the later builds, so generally speaking it is better to update
> than stay at build 55 indefinitely.
>
> Gary Templeman
>
>
> - Original Message - From: "Richard Van Wasshnova"
>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Wasshnova"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 10:59 AM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging basic style source to sourcrewriter
Hi Jenny,
Thanks for the reply. Build 81 is same as 76. I couldn't find any
recent threads on this topic in recent archives so sorry if I'm
repeating.
Hi Jenny,
Thanks for the reply. Build 81 is same as 76. I couldn't find any
recent threads on this topic in recent archives so sorry if I'm
repeating. I would suggest to Legacy that a strong warning that the
sources are not compatible should suffice. Were there any complants
from users that damage
Richard Van Wasshnova wrote
Now with build 76 I'm no longer permitted to merge old style to
soucewriter. I hope this means the source conversion tool's release is
imminent. If not I am very upset with Legacy for removing this option
to merge.
You are not alone, Richard! This topic came up ju
In the previous build (7.0.0.55) I did several merges of old style to
soucewriter census sources. On the first merge I knew it obviously
involved some risk but I had backup. I was pleasantly surprised at the
results, multimedia attached properly and text comments in correct
place. I couldn't imagin
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:37:53 -0400, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>True but it can lead to frustrations and wishes one had not done it .
>;-)
>
>(I am a surgeon and have learned to think things out and learn as much as I
>can "before" making the incision).
But you don't have
Dennis M. Kowallek wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:15:39 -0400, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have 2 individuals who I have now determined are the same person
even though the names of their wives are different (one is a wrong
guess but I want to retain it as an "alt name" optio
RICHARD SCHULTHIES wrote:
IMHO, I reccomend merging the two 'ladies' into one,
which lets you choose the other name as AKA. The no
data is lost in error.
Rich in LA CA
--- Susan Daily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Always make a back up first.
When merging, you will get check marks next to the
dif
IMHO, I reccomend merging the two 'ladies' into one,
which lets you choose the other name as AKA. The no
data is lost in error.
Rich in LA CA
--- Susan Daily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Always make a back up first.
>
> When merging, you will get check marks next to the
> different items on
> bot
Go ahead merge the two husbands. You will have one husband with two
wives. If you chose, merge the two wives and save the second one as
alt name
Denis
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 2:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have 2 individuals who I have now determined are the same person
Always make a back up first.
When merging, you will get check marks next to the different items on
both persons. You check which info you want merged into the main
person. (Select the one who is most correct as the main person, I thnk
it goes on the left.) Be sure to notice all the tabs in the mer
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:15:39 -0400, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have 2 individuals who I have now determined are the same person even
>though the names of their wives are different (one is a wrong guess but I
>want to retain it as an "alt name" option).
>
>I would like to mer
gain by making new copies and re-doing the import/merge.
>
> Bob
>
> - Original Message - From: "Michele Lewis" <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Legacy E-Mail List"
> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 9:35 PM
> Subject: [LegacyUG] Merging two files
>
at it. You are working with copies. Legacy offers
some backup assistance. And, worse case scenario, if you mess something up,
you can start over again by making new copies and re-doing the import/merge.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: "Michele Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Hi Michele,
"Can you tell me step by step the proper way to merge two files? The
two files I want to merge are my family and my husband's family."
You should take a look at the Help System - look up the index under
"merging". You'll find "best practice" instructions there.
Before doing an
Thanks Elizabeth, I will have to have a close look at this and give it a
try.
Colin.
- Original Message -
From: Elizabeth Cunningham
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging family files, advantages
Thanks Heather, sounds clear to me.
Colin.
- Original Message -
From: Heather Stovold
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 5:47 AM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging family files, advantages/disadvantages
I also use my oldest child.
In Legacy, you
, somone else mentioned that also. What is the
reason for that, why pick a particular person?
Colin.
- Original Message - From: Elizabeth Cunningham
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 11:05 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging family files, advantages
AaahI understand.
Thank you for that.
Colin.
- Original Message -
From: Dede Holden
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 11:31 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging family files, advantages/disadvantages
Colin,
I used my oldest child as a
I also use my oldest child.
In Legacy, you can have many of the screens show, at all times, the
relationship to a person in the database. Most people would choose
themselves. Then most of the time, they can see at a glance how the
person/people they are editing is related to them. That is why
ick a particular person?
>
> Colin.
> - Original Message - From: Elizabeth Cunningham
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 11:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging family files, advantages/disadvantages
>
>
> I have al
Of Colin
Liddell
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 11:44 AM
To: Legacy User Group
Subject: [LegacyUG] Merging family files, advantages/disadvantages
Hi folks,
Many years ago when I first started researching my family I kept the files
of the different branches seperated as backup then was to floppy disc
is the
reason for that, why pick a particular person?
Colin.
- Original Message -
From: Elizabeth Cunningham
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 11:05 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging family files, advantages/disadvantages
I have all of mine in
Colin.
- Original Message -
From: The Eccles Family
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 1:37 PM
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Merging family files, advantages/disadvantages
Hi Colin,
I too, started out with separate files for my family based on my parents
and my husb
May 04, 2008 11:44 AM
To: Legacy User Group
Subject: [LegacyUG] Merging family files, advantages/disadvantages
Hi folks,
Many years ago when I first started researching my family I kept the files
of the different branches seperated as backup then was to floppy disc which
held 1.44Mb and eac
Hi folks,
Many years ago when I first started researching my family I kept the files
of the different branches seperated as backup then was to floppy disc which
held 1.44Mb and each branch would fit on one floppy.
With today's technology, ie. Cds, DVDs and USB backup drives there is no
problem
_
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 09:15:05 -0500
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Master Sources problem
>
> Right. I had figured that this must've been what had happene
o.uk/Grimshaw/
For The Fergusons of N.W. England See:
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/fergys/
_
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 09:15:05 -0500
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Subject: Re: [Legac
Right. I had figured that this must've been what had happened. I would
still name this one as a bug though, as it is remains a very undesired
response. The assumption here being that if one is merging a source,
it should include any citations to said source as well. To take it a
step further, mergi
Hi,
On reflection and testing, what I said below isn't correct.
If you combine sources that are both assigned to the same person,
same event - then you'll get duplicated sources.
Normally when you are combining sources they are not both assigned to
the same people/same event as you've simply
rGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Merging Master Sources problem
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 09:15:11 +1100
>
> For Ron.
>
> Have you any idea why this mail finished up in my inbox when all the
> other Legacy mails go to their own box ?
>
> This does happen very occasi
& Wexford
Guild of One-Name Studies No: 4825 for CULLODEN & HIGGINSON
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ronald
ferguson
Sent: Sunday, 9 March 2008 9:12 PM
To: legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Merging Master
rGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Master Sources problem
> Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 15:06:29 -0700
>
> Ron,
>
> Turns out I misspoke. Going back to the computer I did the editing on, I
> actually had used Access and not OpenOffice. I did find this in
.mdb file.
Gary Templeman
- Original Message -
From: "ronald ferguson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2008 3:11 AM
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Merging Master Sources problem
Hi Gary.
There is an error in my last email in that I should have said "MDB&
ECTED]
> To: legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Merging Master Sources problem
> Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 10:11:38 +
>
>
> Hi Gary.
>
> There is an error in my last email in that I should have said "MDB" format
> and not "DOC".
>
> I
milytree.com
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Master Sources problem
> Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 21:12:49 -0800
>
> My Legacy file was a conversion from a previous PAF file. I used OO to edit
> and correct hundreds of notes that did not format properly when a gedcom
> was originally imp
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 1:52 PM
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Merging Master Sources problem
At present I would only consider using Open Office for searching the Legacy
database and not for making changes. In fact I am uncertain if one can write
amendments back int
://www.fergys.co.uk/Grimshaw/
For The Fergusons of N.W. England See:
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/fergys/
_
> Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 10:48:15 -0600
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Subject: R
I may have missed something - but if all you want to do is MERGE
several sources - go to VIEW - MASTER LISTS - SOURCES. Pick the one
you want to merge in to another and then click (at bottom) - combine
source with another on list. Find the second source and highlight it
and click the box again -
1 - 100 of 174 matches
Mail list logo
