On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 09:31:03PM +0200, Robert Helling wrote: > Dear friends, > > > Am 03.10.2016 um 18:06 schrieb Robert C. Helling > > <rob...@euve10195.vserver.de>: > > > > I have three patches on my laptop, one of which is a bugfix. Will send > > tonight with proper internet connection. Hold the horses. > > back home, so here we go: > > > > These three patches are of different character: > > There is no 0001. > > 0002 is something I hacked so I can switch between Buehlmann and VPM-B > from the preferences (rather than just from the planner). It is a bit > rough (and should also grey out those preferences which do not apply to > the active model, to be added later). We should have something like > this, but this patch might need a bit more work and Tomaz promised > something along these lines anyway.
So this should wait until after Beta 1? > 0003 fixes a bug with the heat map when using VPM-B. The scale for the > colors is set by the Buehlmann m-value, so we need to compute that even > when not using Buehlmann. Yesterday, his bug was found by Willem. This I'll look at and push now, before Beta 1 > 0004 is a stub for a CFD: Sometime ago, before starting with our > template based printing, I had submitted some patches to print via TeX. > Those were turned down because we don’t want to add TeX as a dependency, > which I can understand. For my own use to print paper logbook pages, I > kept rebasing this branch and use it for my own build. Now, I realized I > presented this in the wrong way: This is not about printing. This should > be presented as another file format we export to. There is no dependency > to anything, this just writes a text file with data from the dive in the > form of TeX macros. This can then be used to print out the dive, but > only if the user wants to. So, philosophically, this is like many of the > other exports: Those make only sense to use if the user has the other > thing to reimport the data. This patch is only a stub with no real > functionality (it exports only the dive number). The actual code to > write TeX, I did not have with me when I wrote this earlier today on a > train, but I will add this tomorrow if I don’t hear strong opinions to > the opposite. That makes sense to me. I guess I should just take this as well assuming it doesn't break any existing functionality... /D _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list subsurface@subsurface-divelog.org http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface