Once a change is made in RootsMagic or Ancestry, it is marked as changed. Please make a feature to accept all changes instead of needing to click each and every change individually, as long as that event/fact is changed in only one or the other.
For example, if Joe has only a birth year, death year, and first/last name and I add:
-MMDDYYYY to birth
-MMDDYYYY to death
-a middle name
-a marriage date
RM requires clicks to each fact/event to open up update existing event, then a click for add new/update existing/delete, then a click on the boxes to select the box, then click OK (5 clicks). 5 clicks times 4 changes equals 20 clicks. And then one more click to Accept Changes.
I know in another application I use it tracks if it is an existing fact change, a new fact, or a deleted fact. I can review a list of changes before syncing and if that fact/event is changed in both ancestry and the application, it displays both as needing review similar to what RM does. This is where the multiple clicks would be nice.
Today I made changes to 123 people which is a minimum of 738 clicks to accept the changes and I know there were multiple changes for many individuals so more likely 1200 clicks. Not a good use of my time.
Adding to my request. I didn’t realize merging places did not register as a change until another change was done for that person. Also, I Removed a fact from everyone (Christening. I had 550+ problems where the date entered was earlier than their birth, problem solved). However, that change is also not in the Tree Share until another fact on that person is changed.
I really would like both trees to be identical without needing to do accept the changes individually. My mild carpal tunnel limits the number I can accept in a day.
I have read that Place merge changes was desensitized because users felt that the screen froze. A progress bar would help with that misconception.
I too would love it, if when I alter something/someone on Ancestry, it would automatically change it on RM.
If I did a lot of changes on Ancestry would it work if I downloaded the whole tree again onto RM and deleted the old one? I don’t think I’ve got the patience to do them individually.
This is a common strategy to avoid an ongoing task of manually synchronizing every edit. Just download your ancestry tree to a new RM database. you don’t have to delete the old one. In this way, RM essentially becomes a bunch of snapshot backups of your ancestry tree. @thejerrybryan explains it best - RM Treeshare works well for people who work in 1 system - either ancestry or RM - because the initial download is a synchronization.
If you make edits in both systems and want to keep things aligned, managing changes in treeshare is more work. (It should be noted that some people are quite happy with the current treeshare behavior of accepting each change and would complain loudly if things were to change.)
I have the opposite of your workflow. I have a private tree in ancestry for hints but RM is my master db and I don’t worry about keeping my private ancestry tree 100% accurate. Periodically I push a new tree up to ancestry and make it public to share with others. Treeshare works just fine for that purpose.
Thank you very much Kevinm for your helpful advice.
Can you help me with my next query, please?
I like seeing all of my tree at once so how can I change the RM tree to Family View instead of Pedigree View?
There are 6 different views you can select from the main People menu. Family View is right next to Pedigree:
The other views are Descendant, People List, Couples List, and Associations. You can customize the People List view and many people find it helpful to add the Date Edited field so that you can see the last time that details about that person have been updated.
Go to Settings, General Settings, Start View and select Family from the drop list.
Personally, I like my trees to be in sync. I tried the upload to ancestry and needed to first disconnect the current Tree Share (I wanted to retain the tree name). That took a while for me to figure out. If this is the avenue I ultimately utilize, I will be deleting the older tree version so that any incomplete or conflicting information does not remain on Ancestry in the previous upload. TY.
I’ve gone to family view but it doesn’t show siblings or Aunts & Uncles at the same time. Is that possible? If not maybe it will be better if I stick with working on my Ancestry tree and saving it to RM every so often for safety’s sake.
Thanks, but I’ve tried that but still the problem of not being able to see everyone on my tree. I like seeing siblings etc. because it helps tying everyone in and makes sure I’ve got the correct family.
In that case, what’s the use of hassling with RM at all? Why not download it as a GEDCOM for backup purposes? You could also use free or very cheap tools like Louis Kessler’s Behold (Behold website) or others to poke around the GEDCOM.
Actually not sure how you are seeing your whole tree on Ancestry where it shows siblings and Aunts and Uncles at the same time
Family View is only going to show you the couple, their kids and their parents
will show you 5 or 6 generations ( if available of one line)
people list will show everybody in database alphabetically
If your reply was meant to be to me - I do believe I said that myself - to just carry on working on Ancestry and just download a GEDCOM file to RM every now and then for backup safety.
nkess, Have you tried Ancestry - is able to show siblings and Aunts & Uncles - so very helpful. Thank you for your comment.
A similar tree view has been oft-requested from RM. This snippet shows the parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles of two siblings:
What I meant was that you don’t need RM to download a GEDCOM and that there are a lot of easier programs that you can use to take a look at your GEDCOM.
Thank you Rwcrooks for explaining what you meant. xx
I thoroughly agree. Please see my proposal for streamlining treeshare here.
That is quite a detailed suggestion. A lot of time, analysis and effort went into developing it.
Personally, I don’t see the benefits of using treeshare since it appears to be such a hassle to use. But that’s just me.
I used TreeShare for several years and as long as I did frequent sessions, I found it mostly beneficial (except for issues with the citations) and preferred being able to control what moved across and what didn’t.