<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Willem,<div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 01 Feb 2017, at 15:37, Robert Helling <<a href="mailto:helling@atdotde.de" class="">helling@atdotde.de</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">I think an easy approach would be as follows: Yes, we only have one set of cylinders per dive, but you don’t have to use all of them, only those with corresponding gas switch events are shown on the profile (I guess, people, please correct me). So when merging a real dive with a planned one, we could put both lists of cylinders in the dive and only use half of them in the events of a specific “dive computer”.</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div><div class="">I have just created a pull request on github. Could you please test it this is what you want?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Thanks</div><div class="">Robert</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">PS: I have not attacked the „spurious gas changes“ problem you also reported, yet.</div></body></html>