You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
First, thank you for developing this incredibly useful add-on!
I noticed that the current version of Zoplicate seems to skip merging when encountering type mismatches, which is also the default behavior of Zotero (as mentioned in Issue #48). Would it be possible to introduce an option to handle these mismatches during bulk merging? Ideally, users could choose to either skip merging or force the type to match the master item.
This feature is implemented in a similar way in frangoud/ZoteroDuplicatesMerger, with relevant code found here. I'm unsure if it’s straightforward to adapt this for Zotero 7.
I would greatly appreciate it if you could consider adding this functionality.
Thank you for your time and consideration!
Best regards,
Shiguang Wu
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thank you for your feedback! It's a great suggestion. I will add this request to my TODO list and address it later.
Just so you know, duplicates with mismatched item types might have varying fields. As a result, changing the item type could lead to a loss of information.
Hi,
First, thank you for developing this incredibly useful add-on!
I noticed that the current version of Zoplicate seems to skip merging when encountering type mismatches, which is also the default behavior of Zotero (as mentioned in Issue #48). Would it be possible to introduce an option to handle these mismatches during bulk merging? Ideally, users could choose to either skip merging or force the type to match the master item.
This feature is implemented in a similar way in frangoud/ZoteroDuplicatesMerger, with relevant code found here. I'm unsure if it’s straightforward to adapt this for Zotero 7.
I would greatly appreciate it if you could consider adding this functionality.
Thank you for your time and consideration!
Best regards,
Shiguang Wu
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: