The Chinese have a way of thinking about this: thinking is not doing — so go out and do it for a year, or five or twenty five. Thinking each evening while planning the next day's work and study. If we do well enough we may write about it and become a respected master.
I don't know if you have noticed the Chinese and Indians taking over the world's banking, industry and health. We are lucky to have Peter as a master. George On 26 Feb 2013, at 23:29, Peter Bienstman wrote: > On 02/27/2013 05:55 AM, pharmtech wrote: >> It's hard to find a good balance between abstraction/flexibility and >> concreteness/simplicity. I like Mnemosyne's simplicity, but I'm not >> yet sold on how plugins (all the way down to the level of defining >> card types, multiple fields, etc.) will work. If I distribute a deck >> based upon complex fields, layout, etc., it seems like anyone who uses >> that deck will have a tedious learning curve identifying, downloading >> and installing all the plugins required by that deck. > > As I told you a few times before in private conversation, please don't make > any assumptions like that without knowing how libmnemosyne2 is designed. > User-defined card types are stored in the database without the need for > plugins, and interoperate well with the sync and export functionalities. > Also, there is no issue whatsoever with the card browser. > > If you want 'proof' of this, for cloned card types you also don't need to > distribute any plugins. User-defined N-sided card types can make use of > exactly the same machinery, it's just that the UI side of things has not been > written yet... > > Peter -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mnemosyne-proj-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
