Thanks for checking. If someone could post a brief heads up on the download page until it can be fixed, that would help. SwissSys didn’t complain. It just read through the supplement at warp speed, updating the record counter as usual (but without updating the master, of course). If someone were updating for the first time, they might not realize there was a problem.
Based on our download logs, it appears most TDs just go get a new Gold Master file. That has advantages, because the monthly update only lists those players whose RATING has changed, not those whose membership was renewed, new members, etc.
I’ve posted a notice on the download pages. I may not have a chance to get to this for a few days. It recommends that TDs get a new golden master file.
Additionally, for both SwissSys and WinTD, it is very easy to just replace the rating database with the new golden database each month. At least for SwissSys, it is simpler to replace the database entirely than to merge in the monthly supplement update (especially if one skips a month or for whatever reason does not update every single month).
There are certain things that you can do with the supplements that would be difficult with the GDB. I was an assistant TD at the USATMW many years ago, and they were using the December ratings rather than February, except that if someone was unrated in December, the Feb rating was used. You could get that with the supplements by updating to February, then running the December supplement on top of it. (WinTD doesn’t change the expiration date if the one on the local database is more recent, so loading the old supplement didn’t clobber expiration dates).
What I would have done is load both Golden DBs. Then I would update from the December GDB and then select the unrateds and update only selected players from the February GDB (I’ve only been able to change supplments by exiting and then restarting WinTD, but that may be a function of being on Windows XP). I would then cross my fingers and hope I didn’t have that many players rated in December that needced to have their expiration dates checked against the February GDB.
I guess that would qualify as being difficult to do. One concern I’d have with only doing an update from the December supplement is that a player who was last active in August and early January would have the early January rating in the February GDB and would not even appear in the December supplement (though he would appear in the December GDB).