> On Mar 21, 2015, at 5:56 AM, Lubomir I. Ivanov <[email protected]> wrote: > but we need to make some decisions first…
My plan was to figure this out in the first few weeks of the project. If QtBt is sufficient that’s the way I want to go, as this doesn’t require libdivecomputer changes. We can get the data from the dive computer and then hand if off to the parser. To me that is the far superior idea as it allows us to completely control the interaction with the user without having to wait for libdivecomputer API changes. Only if QtBt is still too limited to implement what we need (which I doubt) do I think we should try to add OS specific implementations to libdivecomputer. /D _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
