I'm very happy, that you finally found out how the things work. I hope you also understand now, why it is so important what the scope
we are talking about is. The scope
of our current
implementation is one OpenCPN instance and the last bug I'm aware of (the loss off sharing info for routepoints) stays to be fixed to make it work as designed and expected.
The rest is really just a coincidence and guids in the "exported" gpx, and it is again very important to uderstand that it means user wanted to transfer the data out of the implementation scope, are there just because there aren't two buttons in the routemanager. Nothing more, nothing less.
Of course I would like to extend that scope, but it will get tricky (and will pose new challenges) as we will have to start identifying all those Anns, Betis and Zoes to make it work.
What I would also like is make the guid a primary identifier to the objects, which it now is not by design, but if changed would probably make happy all you guys who think it is the only use this (almost)random string can and should have.
And no, we will never be able to change the files on user's disk(s) just because we don't like their contents