Re: dive site handlinge

Hi, > On 24. Feb 2019, at 21:20, Berthold Stoeger > wrote: > > To me it seems somewhat questionable to create a new dive site for every new > GPS location anyway. Perhaps detach these two things? to me it looks like this has an easy solution: You can prune dive sites upon saving that have no

Re: dive site handling

> On 25 Feb 2019, at 0.11, Dirk Hohndel wrote: > > >> On Feb 24, 2019, at 12:20 PM, Berthold Stoeger >> wrote: >> >> On Sunday, 24 February 2019 20:40:28 CET Dirk Hohndel wrote: >> >>> The issue with not pruning unreferenced dive sites is that over time you >>> might accrue a lot of garbag

Re: dive site handling

> On Feb 24, 2019, at 2:33 PM, Berthold Stoeger > wrote: > > On Sunday, 24 February 2019 23:11:36 CET Dirk Hohndel wrote: >>> On Feb 24, 2019, at 12:20 PM, Berthold Stoeger >>> wrote:> >>> To me it seems somewhat questionable to create a new dive site for every >>> new GPS location anyway. Pe

Re: dive site handling

Hi Berthold > On Feb 24, 2019, at 1:01 AM, Berthold Stoeger > wrote: > > From the comments so far, it seems to me that there are at least four, > probably more, not completely independent problem fields. > > 1) The UI. We want a list of dive sites with add / edit / remove / search > function

Re: dive site handling

On Sunday, 24 February 2019 23:11:36 CET Dirk Hohndel wrote: > > On Feb 24, 2019, at 12:20 PM, Berthold Stoeger > > wrote:> > > To me it seems somewhat questionable to create a new dive site for every > > new GPS location anyway. Perhaps detach these two things? > > The problem is how else would

Re: dive site handling

I love the discussion here... I wish more people would speak up, though... > On Feb 23, 2019, at 7:48 PM, Doug Junkins wrote: > > At this point in our diving “career”, almost every dive is at a new site to > us. What I’ve found is that, usually we are so focused before a dive on > making sure

Re: dive site handling

> On Feb 24, 2019, at 1:25 PM, Henrik B A > wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 8:40 PM Dirk Hohndel > wrote: > Would those be referenced by planned dives? Or do you really mean > "unreferenced", i.e. you create a dive site, save the dive file and

Re: dive site handling

> On Feb 24, 2019, at 12:20 PM, Berthold Stoeger > wrote: > > On Sunday, 24 February 2019 20:40:28 CET Dirk Hohndel wrote: > >> The issue with not pruning unreferenced dive sites is that over time you >> might accrue a lot of garbage in your dive file. E.g., whenever you dive >> with a Garmin

Re: dive site handling

On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 8:40 PM Dirk Hohndel wrote: > Would those be referenced by planned dives? Or do you really mean > "unreferenced", i.e. you create a dive site, save the dive file and quit > the app, and then later add a dive at that site? > Just making sure I understand the model you are p

Re: dive site handling

On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 9:20 PM Berthold Stoeger wrote: > One could have a "prune unused dive sites" button. And for GPS-enabled > dive > computer users an "auto-prune unused dive sites" option. > Good idea! > To me it seems somewhat questionable to create a new dive site for every > new > GPS

Re: dive site handling

On Sunday, 24 February 2019 20:40:28 CET Dirk Hohndel wrote: > The issue with not pruning unreferenced dive sites is that over time you > might accrue a lot of garbage in your dive file. E.g., whenever you dive > with a Garmin Descent or similar dive computer (there are none right now) > that stor

Re: dive site handling

> On Feb 24, 2019, at 4:00 AM, Henrik B A wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 6:32 PM Dirk Hohndel > wrote: > I believe Henrik's proposal pre-dated us adding the country field. I see no > reason to remove the country field. > > No, my initial propose had Site name, Loc

Re: dive site handling

> On Feb 24, 2019, at 3:51 AM, Henrik B A wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 6:31 PM Dirk Hohndel > wrote: > Unreferenced dive sites should not be stored when saving data. But the user > can of course create multiple, redundant dive sites when doing multiple dives > a

Re: dive site handling

On Sun, Feb 24, 2019, 15:34 Willem Ferguson wrote: > On 2019/02/24 16:16, Henrik B A wrote: > > > > An online shared DB could be nice as well, but that's a completely > > different beast IMHO. Also, many sites aren't shareable: They could be > > on private ground, or be secret (risk of artifact t

Re: dive site handling

On 2019/02/24 16:16, Henrik B A wrote: For the initial rework, let's just keep it easy and simple, each user with his/her own dive sites in the local XML (or private cloud obviously). An online shared DB could be nice as well, but that's a completely different beast IMHO. Also, many sites are

Re: dive site handling

On 2019/02/24 16:16, Henrik B A wrote: For the initial rework, let's just keep it easy and simple, each user with his/her own dive sites in the local XML (or private cloud obviously). An online shared DB could be nice as well, but that's a completely different beast IMHO. Also, many sites ar

Re: dive site handling

On Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 23:16 Robert Helling wrote: > But what I was hoping for was that the Subsurface users could create > their own database: Sharing logbook entries has a lot of privacy issues but > I think many of our users would be willing to share dive site information > they collect if the

Re: dive site handling

On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 6:32 PM Dirk Hohndel wrote: > I believe Henrik's proposal pre-dated us adding the country field. I see > no reason to remove the country field. > No, my initial propose had Site name, Location and Country. But I got so much opposition from even mentioning anything resemb

Re: dive site handling

On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 6:31 PM Dirk Hohndel wrote: > Unreferenced dive sites should not be stored when saving data. But the > user can of course create multiple, redundant dive sites when doing > multiple dives at the same site. > Hm, I believe we should be able to have unreferenced dive sites

Re: dive site handling

On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 10:21 AM Willem Ferguson < willemfergu...@zoology.up.ac.za> wrote: > 1) I have never been convinced that writing the dive locations into the > dive log XML is the best solution. > I disagree. The XML is an excellent location for the dive sites, it makes sharing and handl

Re: dive site handling

On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 9:37 PM Dirk Hohndel wrote: > One of the many threads we had on this is archived here (and yeah, the > list archive is a bit painful...) > http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/pipermail/subsurface/2016-April/025412.html > In that thread I pushed back hard on Henrik's idea f

Re: dive site handling

Dear all, On Friday, 22 February 2019 21:37:18 CET Dirk Hohndel wrote: > We went through a few painful iterations in the dive site handling and ended > up on a compromise that few of us really love, many of us actually actively > dislike and that we really want to get to a better state. From the