dball 0 Report post Posted January 30, 2008 Grass Roots Multi-user Genealogy Networks: On Jan 27 Dick Eastman posted a blog item about release of "The Next Generation" version 6.2.0 (see: http://blog.eogn.com/eastmans_online_genea...ne-1.html#more). This is further evidence in the change in the paradigm for genealogy software as one person working on one computer using a genealogy program. Traditionally all collaboration is done through other modes of communication apart from the software or shared in lumps with a GEDCOM. TMG is different in that joint sharing is technically possible. However, the few instances that I have found of TMG being used by two people at once either require that both computers be fully networked (and therefore exposed beyond just TMG project files) or that very challenging hardware and software interfaces with servers and virtual network software and security software was needed that challenges the understanding of all but the elite techies. But the social genealogy networks have bypassed both of those problems and made the concept of multi-user data entry seamless and available to the masses. In addition to "The Next Generation" noted by Dick Eastman, there is an explosion of use of on-line social genealogy networks including Geni.com, WebBiographies.com, Ancestry.com, and MyHeritage.com (the old Gencircles). All of these sites replace genealogy software and look pretty much the same. The “owner” can enter data direct or upload a GEDCOM and have an instant family history website with photos and stories and trees. BUT, the real change is that the owner can authorize other people to add material directly to their site. Each of the providers named here claims clients in the millions, but there is no indication as to how many take advantage of authorizing other people to share on their sites. I do know that people that I helped with their Ball lines have with good intentions voluntarily added me to their list of approved contributors and that suggests that the concept is perhaps an active one. On-line Networks, Virtual or Otherwise: Let’s be clear. I don’t want to share any part of my computer with anyone. I don’t trust anyone enough to let them roam around my machine and not screw something important up. As well, I don’t want to have to be on-line all of the time for others to reach my files. But I would be willing to share access to my one-name TMG project files with a few select researchers through an internet hosting service IF AND ONLY IF 1. The TMG files were easily accessed on-line 2. I always (OK, nearly always) had access 3. I alone would be the one to grant or withdraw permission for each other person to share (it has to be secure so I can sleep at night) 4. I could regularly get TMG project back-ups (several times a day) in case something unfortunate happened, and 5. I didn’t have to have a Geek Squad consultant for an hour each time I wanted to add someone to the party. Right now computer linking technology is a major barrier to the implementation of a TMG-based on-line project network. Most of us are “users” and just want to press the power button, have the computer wake up, click on the TMG icon and start having fun. I am willing to add a few steps to that sequence to get to a website and start up an instance of TMG and start having fun. But watching all of the messages posted on TMG-L for the week following the release of TMG 7, it is clear that a lot of us family genealogists have trouble following even simple computer-related directions and getting our heads around something new and technical. My point is that I don’t want to have to navigate all of the techie steps needed to set up an on-line network (even if WhollyGenes and I could agree on some sort of licensing arrangement). I want WhollyGenes to solve all those problems, package the solutions in a companion software bundle as or if required, and get me up and running quickly. Wishlist Role for WhollyGenes: The ultimate service would, of course, be for WhollyGenes to provide the servers that host the multi-user system and to charge a reasonable rate based on the maximum number of simultaneous users I might contract for (actually, I am hoping that the mysterious WhollyGenes “Family Data Exchange” is just this sort of service ). Licensing would be easier, because the set-up and fees would be tied to the maximum number of parties per contract and WhollyGenes can set up their server to only permit that maximum usage. Whatever connection and administrative software was needed on my computer or on the computers of my research partners would be provided by WhollyGenes as part of the front-end set-up cost to me. Wishlist Summary: I see a growing market niche for cooperative genealogy research over the internet among TMG users including major projects (e.g., book genealogies and one-name studies), families with members in different locations, and even professionals collaborating on projects from different venues. Right now there are significant technical barriers to the average person setting up a functioning network hosted by an internet hosting service provider. TMG is already well suited for multi-user operation (and the new reminders capability in TMG 7.0 now makes setting up data entry standards a piece of cake ). I am hoping that there is a business opportunity here for WhollyGenes to facilitate internet-based joint TMG use. Even if the answer comes back “NO”, it would be really helpful for us that do need to set up such a shared access to get a techno-idiot-friendly set of instructions on how we might arrange shared access through an internet service provider and what we have to do to meet WhollyGenes’ licensing requirements in the process. WhollyGenes continues to provide leading edge vision to the features in TMG; it is my humble opinion that co-operative genealogy projects as offered by the social genealogy websites will grow quickly, perhaps impacting the sales of “point and shoot” genealogy software more than TMG, but the concept of co-operative genealogy is a natural for a wide spectrum of TMG users. Would this be useful to other TMG users as it would be to me? David G. Ball Compiler of The New England Ball Project ballproject@shaw.ca Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elevator 0 Report post Posted January 30, 2008 It sounds like you have already done a fair amount of research into it, but there are currently many ways of doing just this; my way involves a program called phpGedView which allows pretty much exactly what you are looking for in terms of functionality: it allows you to upload a GEDCOM, it allows you to add users and define individual access to each of your users, it allows a community of users to come together to collaborate and organize events and research efforts. The actual program is very easy to install and configure. On the downside, is requires you either to: 1. Install your own webserver with the necessary prerequisites (PHP, MySQL, able to handle expected traffic load), which is my choice. 2. Use a third party hosting service (many of these services specialize in phpGedView and do most the work for you for a nominal fee). Ken. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dball 0 Report post Posted January 31, 2008 (edited) On the downside, is requires you either to:1. Install your own webserver with the necessary prerequisites (PHP, MySQL, able to handle expected traffic load), which is my choice. 2. Use a third party hosting service (many of these services specialize in phpGedView and do most the work for you for a nominal fee). Ken. Warren Culpepper some time ago wrote up how to do the webserver option with TMG (but did not cover TMG licensing issues; see: http://www.tmgtips.com/tmg5_network.htm) and I suspect that the third party hosting service is also technically possible with TMG, but would doubtless be outside of the licensing agreement of one user per one TMG. But more to the point, you are clearly demonstrating that there is a market for cooperative genealogy research, because you are doing it. BUT NOT WITH TMG! My position with a huge one-name study is that I really, REALLY, want to use TMG as my software platform and to use Second Site as my website software. I understand the concept of the technical solutions, I just do not want to have to deal with them, nor do I want to have to explain them to someone that I otherwise trust to work with me on my one-name study. I want WhollyGenes to make collaboration technologically non-threatening. I am seriously hoping that there is a positive business case for them to provide that service. I am sensing that the wider genealogy market has already decided that collaborative genealogy is a market niche whose time has come and your response is just what I want WhollyGenes to be keenly aware of.......other software solutions are already getting a foothold on the collaboration market. Edited January 31, 2008 by dball Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elevator 0 Report post Posted January 31, 2008 Most of my users are notoriously technologically challenged, but it doesn't really matter because as long as there is ONE person on your team that is able to configure and get the program up running, the inner intricates of such a solution is invisible to the end-user. As such my partners are able to work on our common project without really knowing anything except how to enter data onto forms and do their genealogical research. Also once the initial technical work is done, the system can largely run itself without the need for additional technical expertise. But of course that collaboration is not inherently integrated with TMG and it is necessary to import GEDCOM of data from phpGedView and export data from TMG into phpGedView. As such I can see the immediate usefulness of an application that can synchronize genealogical research between a large number of users without the fear that data from one user may become "out of synch" with the rest. By the way WhollyGenes licensing of TMG shouldn't be a problem because the license is for the use of the program not the data. As such you are free to use whatever external software to maintain the data without violating any licenses. What I am really trying to say that while this is a fantastic idea, I have a few objections to the concept: 1. There are already a number of well-established solutions available out there. 2. There are already websites that provide hosting services for projects like this. 3. TMG's exisiting user base may not be large enough to warrant the development og such a major feature. If you are looking for genealogical online collaboration software with NO technical expertise required from your side, there are numerous hosts that do that too: http://www.ourroots.info/ http://www.gedview.com/phpgedview.jsp http://www.yourbeginnings.com/ All these websites use phpGedView as the platform, but similar services exist for other software. Ken. Warren Culpepper some time ago wrote up how to do the webserver option with TMG (but did not cover TMG licensing issues; see: http://www.tmgtips.com/tmg5_network.htm) and I suspect that the third party hosting service is also technically possible with TMG, but would doubtless be outside of the licensing agreement of one user per one TMG. But more to the point, you are clearly demonstrating that there is a market for cooperative genealogy research, because you are doing it. BUT NOT WITH TMG! My position with a huge one-name study is that I really, REALLY, want to use TMG as my software platform and to use Second Site as my website software. I understand the concept of the technical solutions, I just do not want to have to deal with them, nor do I want to have to explain them to someone that I otherwise trust to work with me on my one-name study. I want WhollyGenes to make collaboration technologically non-threatening. I am seriously hoping that there is a positive business case for them to provide that service. I am sensing that the wider genealogy market has already decided that collaborative genealogy is a market niche whose time has come and your response is just what I want WhollyGenes to be keenly aware of.......other software solutions are already getting a foothold on the collaboration market. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dball 0 Report post Posted February 1, 2008 <snip>But of course that collaboration is not inherently integrated with TMG and it is necessary to import GEDCOM of data from phpGedView and export data from TMG into phpGedView. <snip> And that is the heart of what I am trying to avoid. Not everything I do in TMG will pass neatly back and forth through a GEDCOM. And more important, bringing a GEDCOM back into TMG requires time and effort on my part and that defeats the efficiency of the collaboration process that I am proposing. If all I wanted was the GEDCOM data structure, I could use any of the on-line social genealogy services for the collaboration, just as you suggest. In favor of my wishlist proposal, I don't think that the potential size of TMG's collaboration market is a barrier to providing that service, given that WhollyGenes already has on-line servers and, I would hope, all of the technical expertise in-house. If demand is greater than a single test server (or part of a server), then there should be revenues from the service sufficient to cover the cost of another server. Their front end cost is in the development of the server software interface to get each customer to the correct project files, as well as a billing and monitoring system, all of which, I have to believe, is very similar to standard software for internet hosting services. Thanks for responding, though; you are helping to clarify the selling points of a WhollyGenes collaboration service. Dave Ball Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elevator 0 Report post Posted February 2, 2008 Yes naturally, to seriously use some of the already existing online genealogical collaboration solutions out there, you would have to more or less abandon TMG unless you’re willing to deal with the synchronization issues or unless you have a project in which information can occasionally be out of synch just to be brought up to date at various points in time. For me it works great; I allow family members and other fellow genealogists working on the same line to add, edit and view information online, and then occasionally this information is entered into my personal copy of TMG. I assume my fellow researchers do the same thing on their end: that is; they have their own private genealogy program that they and only they have access to, and then we all have our “joint venture” so to speak online, where we come together to share research, thoughts and sources and then each one of us decides how much information (if any) we want to include in our own personal copy of the family research. But I can without a doubt see the usefulness of your suggestion, but the way I see it; it would be a two step process: TMG would HAVE to become a multi-user system. Currently there is no way for more than one user to share the data (and keep it synchronized). As far as I know, there is no way to put the data on, say, a server somewhere on a shared network and then two people with licensed copies of TMG accessing the SAME DATA at the SAME TIME. Such a feature would be tremendously valuable because it would allow collaboration through a LAN or WAN. The next step would be to move this multi-user functionality to a web server on WhollyGenes servers hold user data and a web interface to implement the solution you have in mind (if I have understood you correctly). I have no idea whatsoever about the inner workings of TMG, but I suspect that the data access layer of the application is rather proprietary and that a change of database access layer to interface with other database back-ends (say MS SQL Server or MySQL) would require more or less a complete rewrite of this particular code. I would love to see anyone involved in the direct development on the program to elaborate around your request because obviously I am the wrong person to do so. I can see the usefulness of your request though, and I support it wholeheartedly! I believe it is a long and costly way to go though from the current perspective. Ken. And that is the heart of what I am trying to avoid. Not everything I do in TMG will pass neatly back and forth through a GEDCOM. And more important, bringing a GEDCOM back into TMG requires time and effort on my part and that defeats the efficiency of the collaboration process that I am proposing. If all I wanted was the GEDCOM data structure, I could use any of the on-line social genealogy services for the collaboration, just as you suggest. In favor of my wishlist proposal, I don't think that the potential size of TMG's collaboration market is a barrier to providing that service, given that WhollyGenes already has on-line servers and, I would hope, all of the technical expertise in-house. If demand is greater than a single test server (or part of a server), then there should be revenues from the service sufficient to cover the cost of another server. Their front end cost is in the development of the server software interface to get each customer to the correct project files, as well as a billing and monitoring system, all of which, I have to believe, is very similar to standard software for internet hosting services. Thanks for responding, though; you are helping to clarify the selling points of a WhollyGenes collaboration service. Dave Ball Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dball 0 Report post Posted February 2, 2008 <snip>[*]TMG would HAVE to become a multi-user system. Currently there is no way for more than one user to share the data (and keep it synchronized). As far as I know, there is no way to put the data on, say, a server somewhere on a shared network and then two people with licensed copies of TMG accessing the SAME DATA at the SAME TIME. Such a feature would be tremendously valuable because it would allow collaboration through a LAN or WAN. <snip> Ken, TMG already can be and has been shared on either a private server (see Warren Culpepper's article) or by connecting two computers. Remember that a single TMG program can be opened in several "instances" and work on the same project simultaneously (but not the same tag or "record"; although the same tag can be opened as "read-only" by the others). So nothing has to be done to TMG; the single project will always be up to date for all users. I am only asking for the sharing to be made easier. Dave Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elevator 0 Report post Posted February 2, 2008 (edited) TMG, if adopted into a multiuser environment per your specifications, CANNOT be both provider AND consumer of the data. Warren Culpepper's solutions involve connecting via VPN, RDC or Terminal Server to the computer holding the TMG data and execute the instance of TMG on that computer. In a true multiuser environment data isolation is key. The data should NEVER be on the same computer where TMG is installed. The only way this can be done is by hosting the data on, for example, a Linux/Unix MySQL server (the free solution) or a MS SQL server (the expensive solution) and having TMG connect remotely to this server and consume the data provided by this server. The VPN, RDC solution can work for a few users, but in situations like me where I have more than 250 family members registered on my phpGedView website and at least 20-30 of them connect every day, it is easy to see how such a solution would be absurd. (If this was one VPN, RDC computer I'd love to see it run 20 instances of TMG ) Of course this is putting it on the edge a bit, but one cannot presume a program to be "multi-user" if in practice it shows that reliably only 2-5 users can connect simultaneously. All respect to Warren Culpepper, but if you can call TMG a multiuser program because you can VPN to it, then you can call any 32+ bit single-user program multi-user because you can VPN to those also. Even if you accept a solution using VPN or RDC there is no way this solution can be built upon to further develop what you in reality want: a multiuser collaboration suite, because if hosted on WhollyGenes servers, it would not be feasible to have people VPN to establish Terminal Server connection to their servers to access their data. Because if these limitations I cannot accept that TMG "works" in a multiuser environment. In addition to this, I still see some basic problems: 1. External exhibits are still stored with absolute paths wich makes migration anywhere a pain. The data must allow migration anywhere at any time without the danger og breaking any links between data and external exhibits. The way ALL multi-user application solves this problem is by storing external data using paths relative to a "root" location in the directory tree on the server (imagine load balancing scenarios...) 2. The database engine must allow for a server based data accessing layer. The use of VFP, MS Jet or similar in multiuser environments is ridiculous and must be replaced by systems built for this type of database access (such as MS SQL server, MySQL, PostgreSQL, even SQLlite). Such multiuser systems are made for multiuser access and allows the creation of user accounts and granular access control. I don't mean to play devils advocate here or shoot your idea down, because, believe me, I think it is an excellent suggestion and I would love to see it implemented. I just think that TMG in it's current state has a long way to go to that point. Ken. TMG already can be and has been shared on either a private server (see Warren Culpepper's article) or by connecting two computers. Remember that a single TMG program can be opened in several "instances" and work on the same project simultaneously (but not the same tag or "record"; although the same tag can be opened as "read-only" by the others). So nothing has to be done to TMG; the single project will always be up to date for all users. I am only asking for the sharing to be made easier. Edited February 2, 2008 by elevator Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Laliberte 0 Report post Posted June 12, 2009 Hi, Have you considered web sync services like dropbox and Syncplicity? Where you can share (and sync) folders with other people. I'm tempted to try this to work on the same project with my father. Has anybody tried this before? http://www.syncplicity.com/ or http://www.getdropbox.com/ Martin Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Helmut Leininger 0 Report post Posted June 12, 2009 Martin, Have you considered web sync services like dropbox and Syncplicity? Where you can share (and sync) folders with other people. I'm tempted to try this to work on the same project with my father. Has anybody tried this before? http://www.syncplicity.com/ or http://www.getdropbox.com/ Synchronising files across several computers is much different from multi-user access. In multi-user access, more than one user can access a SINGLE COPY of the DATABASE (wherever it might be stored) AT THE SAME TIME (concurrently). Whereas with filesynchronisation, ONLY ONE USER at a time may work with the database, else "the last one is the winner" or the database may even become destroyed or inconsistent. Regards Helmut Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jim Byram 0 Report post Posted June 12, 2009 Martin, Have you considered web sync services like dropbox and Syncplicity? Where you can share (and sync) folders with other people. I'm tempted to try this to work on the same project with my father. Be careful. Synchronization normally involves comparing two sets of files and keeping the latest version of each file. TMG's database consists of many files and the most recent set of files needs to be retained. If you synchronize the files from two databases and end up with the latest files from the two sets (rather than the latest set), you destroy the database. Jim Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Laliberte 0 Report post Posted June 12, 2009 Hi Jim, I'll be careful. It took me weeks to get my dad's work and mine to be at the same page... no plans to screw it up! Until now, we basically worked on the same project, one person at a time. When one's done entering some data he creates a backup and e-mails it to the other. So there is only 1 person working at a time. (I must specify that we are 300 miles apart...) I don't need to tell you how it's slowing things down. What I'm planning to do with Syncplicity is to still have only 1 person working on the project at any time but at least I'll avoid the backup/restore process. Maybe not too many people are in the same situation (where more than one researcher work on the same project file). Martin Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyH3rd 0 Report post Posted June 13, 2009 Hi Jim, I'll be careful. It took me weeks to get my dad's work and mine to be at the same page... no plans to screw it up! Until now, we basically worked on the same project, one person at a time. When one's done entering some data he creates a backup and e-mails it to the other. So there is only 1 person working at a time. (I must specify that we are 300 miles apart...) I don't need to tell you how it's slowing things down. What I'm planning to do with Syncplicity is to still have only 1 person working on the project at any time but at least I'll avoid the backup/restore process. Maybe not too many people are in the same situation (where more than one researcher work on the same project file). Martin My cousin and I simplified things somewhat. We each just run an individual narrative each night on anyone we edited/added that day and e-mail that to the other then enter the received data into our own systems. No backup/restore to mess with. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites