From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Richard M. Stallman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: thumbs.el and transparency Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 11:45:09 -0500 Message-ID: References: <17366.53124.274532.548329@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <878xspwnjm.fsf@jurta.org> <87slqvfobk.fsf@jurta.org> <87d5hy43b6.fsf@jurta.org> <87u0b8lwhw.fsf@jurta.org> <87bqxgynfn.fsf@jurta.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1139693793 13609 80.91.229.2 (11 Feb 2006 21:36:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 21:36:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, brakjoller@gmail.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 11 22:36:33 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F82Pr-0007bL-Pr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2006 22:36:28 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F820Y-0002iW-PZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2006 16:10:18 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F81Je-0004CG-T2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2006 15:25:58 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F80zi-0005an-KN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2006 15:05:23 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F80IP-0007uG-UI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2006 14:20:38 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1F7xw1-0003AU-By for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2006 11:49:21 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1F7xrx-0003h2-V2; Sat, 11 Feb 2006 11:45:10 -0500 Original-To: Juri Linkov In-reply-to: <87bqxgynfn.fsf@jurta.org> (message from Juri Linkov on Fri, 10 Feb 2006 03:29:33 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:50366 Archived-At: I based my reasoning on an opinion expressed on this thread that both packages should exist in Emacs. But actually I have no opinion about this. Given the choice between a simple thumbnail package and more advanced one, I personally would definitely select the latter. I think it should be possible to make tumme do everything that thumbs can do, and just as conveniently. I think instead of adding all features of thumbs.el to tumme.el it is more urgent to make tumme.el more usable, so it would have more than one user ;-) I agree, that is the first thing to be done. But hasn't a lot of it been done in the past week?