Hi Jiri,
All reasonable requests and good ideas, but not trivial to implement
(for your reference, the current algorithm took about a year).
I suggest you open this as a feature request on our user voice forum.
That way, people can vote for it, which helps me to prioritise.
Thanks!
Peter
On 03/07/2013 06:06 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Hello,
I've started using Mnemosyne recently and the one thing that most annoys me
about it is practically missing conflict resolution when synchronizing. Since I
make my own set of cards, I edit cards and add new very often; when there's a
conflict while syncing, all the edits and new cards are gone (because you
basically discard one repository and clone the other). This has happened to me
several times over the last month.
I understand that having sort of automatic conflict resolution is close to
impossible even in systems designed to allow it, like git. Even more impossible
it is with Mnemosyne, which doesn't store history in its database. And I don't
think that this is what should be desired.
However, what I think Mnemosyne _should_ do, is, at least synchronize cards
that don't cause conflicts, so you wouldn't lose new cards or training data
because you edited a single card on both machines. On top of that, the
conflicting cards could just both be retained (let's say with a tag CONFLICT)
to be reviewed by the user later. The user would then decide which of the cards
should be deleted, synchronize again and be happy.
For the record, I'm using Mnemosyne 2.0 on Debian.
Regards
Jiri Palecek
--
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.
