From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: "Richard M. Stallman" <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: removal of erc-viper.el
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 13:45:41 -0500
Message-ID: <E1F3e21-0004Dg-MP@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <m2hd7mg4uf.fsf@roisin.local>
	<17373.12632.160126.839488@kahikatea.snap.net.nz>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1138647245 24767 80.91.229.2 (30 Jan 2006 18:54:05 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:54:05 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: hober0@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 30 19:53:59 2006
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
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 1F3e7d-0007D1-4r
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 19:51:30 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1F3eAb-00023b-5g
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 13:54:33 -0500
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1F3e5o-00077F-V0
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 13:49:37 -0500
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1F3e5l-00075O-8m
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 13:49:33 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F3e5k-000757-FO
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 13:49:32 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1F3e46-0002my-7G
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 13:47:50 -0500
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1F3e21-0004Dg-MP; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 13:45:41 -0500
Original-To: Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz>
In-reply-to: <17373.12632.160126.839488@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> (message from
	Nick Roberts on Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:19:19 +1300)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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:49771
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/49771>

    How can it be disirable to have two IRC packages but not two thumbnail
    packages?

Because the details of the situation are different.  rcirc and ERC
cater to very different groups of users, who want very different
things.  We don't see how any one program could be good for all of
them.

By contrast, thumbs and tumme do pretty much the same thing.