John,
> On 06.04.2016, at 21:06, John Van Ostrand wrote:
>
> For those following this. This might be a display problem more than a bug
> with the algo. Turning "3m incremental stops" on makes it break. So it's the
> 3m ceilings that appear broken not the actual ceilings.
I have deployed subsurface to my own device! Yay! Here is what I had to do (and
of course: Thanks Dirk and Tomaz for paving 99% of the path).
From c55f2e4992c26d4cb8586f5bcf16bd37f6d7f3fc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Robert C. Helling"
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 21:56:18 +0200
On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 05:56:26PM -0300, Tomaz Canabrava wrote:
> Due massive request. :)
So this does not apply to master. Does this assume that I first apply the
patches in your "do not apply, this is broken and horrible" email? Could
you maybe create a clean patch series against current
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 10:55 PM, wrote:
>
>
>
> John,
>
> On 6 April 2016 at 12:02, John Van Ostrand wrote:
>
>> I have an example where VPM-B +0 gives an earlier and longer deco
>> obligation than VPM-B +1 and +2 for the same imported dive. I found
>>