Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [AQ_NFS] Re: updating ordinances

Expand Messages
  • S Douglas Cline
    Gaylon, I have not yet heard anything about the problem that I mentioned earlier and that Tom Huber wrote to you about concerning the Ordinance Reservation and
    Message 1 of 11 , Feb 12, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Gaylon,



      I have not yet heard anything about the problem that I mentioned earlier and
      that Tom Huber wrote to you about concerning the Ordinance Reservation and
      Tracking Systems inability to update sealing ordinances through the Update
      Ordinances function. I didn't know whether this as fallen "through the
      cracks" or whether it's simply something that you're working on. Could you
      please advise as to whether this is a problem or whether AQ was never meant
      to update couple or child to parent sealings?



      Thanks in advance



      S Douglas Cline

      Cell: 801 560-2340





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • ghfindlay
      I have taken some time to look into this. I found 3 things: 1) The Update Ordinances function seems to work as designed. 2) FamilySearch is starting to have
      Message 2 of 11 , Feb 19, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        I have taken some time to look into this. I found 3 things:

        1) The Update Ordinances function seems to work as designed.

        2) FamilySearch is starting to have some issues with dropping the communication between AQ and nFS. As a result, some things that in the past have run quickly, now often run slowly, or not at all. We have let FamilySearch know of our concern that they may have broken something recently. I have found that if a process such as updating ordinances seems to 'hang,' that you may need to wait a day and try again. Most of the time, things seem to work normally for me, but we are hearing from a few users of both AQ and nFS, that some processes which no longer complete on one day, will complete the next day.

        3) One of the safeguards in the design of the Update Ordinance function may lead a user to occasionally think that something didn't work. Here is an example:

        In FamilySearch, let's say that you have:

        Robert (AAA-BBBB) == Mary (CCC-DDDD)
        |
        Robert Jr (EEE-FFFF)

        You also have a duplicate for Robert, such that there is also:

        Robert (GGG-HHHH) == Mary (CCC-DDDD)
        |
        Robert Jr (EEE-FFFF)

        In the Temple records, Robert Jr is sealed to Robert (AAA-BBBB) and Mary (CCC-DDDD). But you have linked your copy of Robert Sr to (GGG-HHHH), and there is no sealing between this record of Robert Sr and Robert Jr.

        When AQ looks for Sealings -- whether spouse or child/parent -- it requires that the links are established correctly, otherwise it will assume that the sealing was not completed between the people in your file.

        I don't know whether this example was clear enough, but I hope it helps.

        In any case, the only time I saw in my testing, where a sealing was not transferred from the Temple System to AQ through the Update Ordinance feature, was when people were not linked correctly.

        If anyone has examples of where AQ fails to update an ordinance when linkages are correct, I would like for them to send me a backup of their database, and a note as to which people are not being updated.

        Gaylon


        --- In AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com, "S Douglas Cline" <clinesd@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        > Gaylon,
        >
        >
        >
        > I have not yet heard anything about the problem that I mentioned earlier and
        > that Tom Huber wrote to you about concerning the Ordinance Reservation and
        > Tracking Systems inability to update sealing ordinances through the Update
        > Ordinances function. I didn't know whether this as fallen "through the
        > cracks" or whether it's simply something that you're working on. Could you
        > please advise as to whether this is a problem or whether AQ was never meant
        > to update couple or child to parent sealings?
        >
        >
        >
        > Thanks in advance
        >
        >
        >
        > S Douglas Cline
        >
        > Cell: 801 560-2340
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • Tom Huber
        ... linkages are correct, I would like for them to send me a backup of their database, and a note as to which people are not being updated. ... I have run into
        Message 3 of 11 , Feb 19, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 01:03:28 -0000, you wrote:

          >If anyone has examples of where AQ fails to update an ordinance when
          linkages are correct, I would like for them to send me a backup of their
          database, and a note as to which people are not being updated.
          >
          I have run into numerous instances where I run Update Ordinances and
          some very old ordinances are suddenly "found" and the records updated.
          I've always attributed these to continued updates of the data from
          previously non-included records.

          I have a very large database and several areas seem to fail to update
          as intended. One of them is after I've reserved a record, AQ puts in
          submitted (with date), but the Update Ordinances fails to Update from
          "Submitted (with date)" to "In process". Keep in mind that this may
          because I have not printed a FOR or had cards printed for the
          ordinances.

          I've also seen instances where I run the "Manage Batches", reconcile,
          and update all. I do not do anything with the Update or Update Local
          functions, but would rather leave it to Update Ordinances to handle.
          They don't always do the job and I can come back (after shutting down
          AQ, recycling the computer) and still see the fields with an asterisk,
          indicating that it needs to be updated with my local records.

          Because we are moving toward Family Tree, I haven't taken time to
          report the problem because I feel that working on some of these at
          this time may not be the best use of time. If I'm wrong, I'll do the
          research and report back privately with a copy of the database and
          also the PIDs and RINs of those impacted.

          Tom


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Sherry Burger
          Gaylon - I have been attempting to use this function to update ordinances of sealing to parent and spouse for months (perhaps 7 or 8). It has never worked. I
          Message 4 of 11 , Feb 19, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Gaylon -



            I have been attempting to use this function to update ordinances of sealing
            to parent and spouse for months (perhaps 7 or 8). It has never worked. I
            don't feel this is a new thing..



            S. Burger



            From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
            gfindlay@...
            Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 6:03 PM
            To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [AQ_NFS] Re: updating ordinances





            I have taken some time to look into this. I found 3 things:

            1) The Update Ordinances function seems to work as designed.

            2) FamilySearch is starting to have some issues with dropping the
            communication between AQ and nFS. As a result, some things that in the past
            have run quickly, now often run slowly, or not at all. We have let
            FamilySearch know of our concern that they may have broken something
            recently. I have found that if a process such as updating ordinances seems
            to 'hang,' that you may need to wait a day and try again. Most of the time,
            things seem to work normally for me, but we are hearing from a few users of
            both AQ and nFS, that some processes which no longer complete on one day,
            will complete the next day.

            3) One of the safeguards in the design of the Update Ordinance function may
            lead a user to occasionally think that something didn't work. Here is an
            example:

            In FamilySearch, let's say that you have:

            Robert (AAA-BBBB) == Mary (CCC-DDDD)
            |
            Robert Jr (EEE-FFFF)

            You also have a duplicate for Robert, such that there is also:

            Robert (GGG-HHHH) == Mary (CCC-DDDD)
            |
            Robert Jr (EEE-FFFF)

            In the Temple records, Robert Jr is sealed to Robert (AAA-BBBB) and Mary
            (CCC-DDDD). But you have linked your copy of Robert Sr to (GGG-HHHH), and
            there is no sealing between this record of Robert Sr and Robert Jr.

            When AQ looks for Sealings -- whether spouse or child/parent -- it requires
            that the links are established correctly, otherwise it will assume that the
            sealing was not completed between the people in your file.

            I don't know whether this example was clear enough, but I hope it helps.

            In any case, the only time I saw in my testing, where a sealing was not
            transferred from the Temple System to AQ through the Update Ordinance
            feature, was when people were not linked correctly.

            If anyone has examples of where AQ fails to update an ordinance when
            linkages are correct, I would like for them to send me a backup of their
            database, and a note as to which people are not being updated.

            Gaylon

            --- In AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> , "S Douglas
            Cline" wrote:
            >
            >
            >
            > Gaylon,
            >
            >
            >
            > I have not yet heard anything about the problem that I mentioned earlier
            and
            > that Tom Huber wrote to you about concerning the Ordinance Reservation and
            > Tracking Systems inability to update sealing ordinances through the Update
            > Ordinances function. I didn't know whether this as fallen "through the
            > cracks" or whether it's simply something that you're working on. Could you
            > please advise as to whether this is a problem or whether AQ was never
            meant
            > to update couple or child to parent sealings?
            >
            >
            >
            > Thanks in advance
            >
            >
            >
            > S Douglas Cline
            >
            > Cell: 801 560-2340
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Gaylon Findlay
            All: Over the last couple of weeks, we have heard that many of you are finding that AQ seems to hang a lot when working with nFS. Apparently, as FamilySearch
            Message 5 of 11 , Feb 21, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              All:

              Over the last couple of weeks, we have heard that many of you are finding that AQ seems to hang a lot when working with nFS. Apparently, as FamilySearch is making changes toward implementing Family Tree, they broke something in nFS, causing AQ to hang while waiting for nFS to respond to AQ's requests for data.

              We have just put out a patch file that should fix this.

              The patch file also fixes a problem with AQ's new "Update Ordinances" feature not updating Sealings when the local database has "Submitted" or "In Progress" for the ordinance status.

              At the request of FamilySearch, we are disabling the "Combine" capability for FamilySearch records until we have the ability to Merge in Family Tree. This patch will disable the Combine.

              You can download the patch here:

              http://www.inclinesoftware.net/files/Latest.zip

              Extract the contents of this file into your AQ 14 program folder. If you successfully replace the old file, the date in the About screen of AQ will show 2/21/13.

              Gaylon
            • S Douglas Cline
              For those of us uncertain as to exactly how to extract the contents of the file INTO our AQ 14, could you give us detailed instructions? S Douglas Cline Brown
              Message 6 of 11 , Feb 22, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                For those of us uncertain as to exactly how to extract the contents of the
                file INTO our AQ 14, could you give us detailed instructions?



                S Douglas Cline

                Brown & Young Companies

                Cell: 801 560-2340





                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • thomas_nevin_huber
                For Windows 7 users, the path to the AQ14 programs is: C: Program Files (x86) Incline Software Ancestral Quest 14 For other systems, you may find the path
                Message 7 of 11 , Feb 22, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  For Windows 7 users, the path to the AQ14 programs is:
                  C:\Program Files (x86)\Incline Software\Ancestral Quest 14

                  For other systems, you may find the path under:
                  C:\Program Files\Incline Software\Ancestral Quest 14

                  This is where you want to _save_ the downloaded file. Then unpack the
                  file (Most windows systems include the ability) to the same directory.
                  In some systems, you will need to provide adminstrator authority (for
                  both saving and unpacking/overwriting the files).

                  After you've unpacked the software, start AQ. Go to Help... About
                  Ancestral Quest... and look at the date at the top of the window that
                  opens. If you did unpacked the patch correctly, you will see the
                  2/21/2013 date.

                  On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 11:19:51 -0700, you wrote:

                  >
                  >
                  >For those of us uncertain as to exactly how to extract the contents of the
                  >file INTO our AQ 14, could you give us detailed instructions?
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >S Douglas Cline
                  >
                  >Brown & Young Companies
                  >
                  >Cell: 801 560-2340
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • S Douglas Cline
                  For those of you wondering, there should be two files found in Gaylon s link. The first is AncQuest and the other is AQ.1033Lng. Simply highlight the files,
                  Message 8 of 11 , Feb 22, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    For those of you wondering, there should be two files found in Gaylon's
                    link. The first is AncQuest and the other is AQ.1033Lng. Simply highlight
                    the files, right click, copy and then paste them in your AQ14 folder. You
                    will receive a message to copy and replace each file. Select copy and
                    replace and you should be fine. However, you virus software may not
                    recognize your AQ now that you have the new files installed since they
                    weren't installed through an AQ update. In this case uncheck the box in the
                    virus checker to not ask the question each time that AQ is initialized.



                    Hope this helps.



                    S Douglas Cline

                    Brown & Young Companies

                    Cell: 801 560-2340





                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.