> On 25 Feb 2019, at 0.11, Dirk Hohndel <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On Feb 24, 2019, at 12:20 PM, Berthold Stoeger <[email protected]> >> 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 Descent or similar dive computer (there are none right now) >>> that store GPS data, that creates a new dive site. Typically I then switch >>> to the existing one if I have been at this site before, which creates an >>> unreferenced site. Having all of those accumulate over time might be >>> annoying. >> >> One could have a "prune unused dive sites" button. And for GPS-enabled dive >> computer users an "auto-prune unused dive sites" option. > > You know how much I love new options and more buttons. But you are of course > correct in principle :-) > >> 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 we do this? > From a workflow perspective... I have a GPS dive computer. I download from it. > It provides me with GPS information. So after the download I should have an > un-named dive site with the correct GPS information, shouldn't I? What would > be > a better workflow?
The GPS location recorded by DC should not become a divesite automatically. It is information that should probably be recorded under divecomputer (in the old XML format) next to samples. We just use that GPS information afterwards when creating a divesite. miika _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
