On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Salvador Cuñat <[email protected]> wrote:
> At the moment, if we have, say, dives ... 100, 101 and 102 and we merge 101 
> and
> 102, we get a list numbered ... 99, 100, 102. This is, probably, an
> undesired behavior. The patch simple chooses lower of both dive numbers 
> instead
> of higher one.

Acked-by: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

That said, when you start merging dives, you usually do end up having
to renumber subsequent dives anyway, but this is the right thing to do
anyway.

             Linus
_______________________________________________
subsurface mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface

Reply via email to